IODP Proceedings Volume contents Search | |||
![]() | |||
Expedition reports Research results Supplementary material Drilling maps Expedition bibliography | |||
doi:10.2204/iodp.proc.335.102.2012 Igneous petrologyRock description procedures during Expedition 335 closely followed those used during IODP Expeditions 304/305 (Blackman, Ildefonse, John, Ohara, Miller, MacLeod, and the Expedition 304/305 Scientists, 2006) and 309/312 (Teagle, Alt, Umino, Miyashita, Banerjee, Wilson, and the Expedition 309/312 Scientists, 2006). These, in turn, were based on ODP Leg 209 and earlier “gabbro” legs (ODP Legs 118, 147, 153, and 176) to maintain a relatively high degree of uniformity. As during Legs 176, 206, and 209 and Expeditions 304/305 and 309/312, core descriptions were performed by the entire igneous petrology team working together. Each member was responsible for one or more aspects of the description (igneous contacts, textures, mineral modes, and habits) to ensure consistency of recorded observations throughout the core, but commonly the entire team would work together, particularly when defining units and contacts. Recovered core was described macroscopically and microscopically, and its characteristics were entered into the LIMS database through the DESClogik portal. Key information was entered into the Section-Unit summary tab in DESClogik. This information was then used for the production of VCDs, which summarize the description of each section of core (see “Core descriptions”). A key to symbols used on the VCDs is given in Figure F6. Igneous units and contact logsThe first step in describing core was the identification of unit boundaries on the basis of the presence of contacts, chilled margins, changes in primary mineralogy, color, grain size, and structural or textural variations. Igneous units in Hole 1256D were numbered continuously from the end of Expedition 312, starting with Unit 1256D-96. Lithologically and texturally similar pieces from consecutive core sections were curated as belonging to the same unit. In order to preserve important information about igneous stratigraphy without defining an unreasonable number of units within a single core, subunits were designated in cases where there were marked changes in texture without accompanying changes in mineralogy, or vice versa. In addition, crosscutting veins and thin dikes were generally designated as subunits. Where contacts deviated from horizontal within the core reference frame, their depth was logged at their midpoint. The igneous unit and contact log (see Table T4 in the “Site 1256” chapter) provides information about unit boundaries and a brief description of each unit. For each unit, the table lists unit number, depth (in meters below seafloor) of its top, core-section-interval and piece number of the top of the unit, unit thickness, lithology, a description of the upper and lower boundaries, and a unit description. Macroscopic core descriptionMacroscopic descriptions were divided into the following categories. LithologyPlutonic rocksPlutonic rocks were classified on the basis of abundance, grain size, and texture of their primary minerals (as inferred prior to alteration), based on the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) system (Streckeisen, 1974; Le Maitre, 1989; Le Maitre et al., 2002). This classification defines the following rocks (Figs. F7, F8):
In the IUGS classification, diorite is distinguished from gabbro by the anorthite content of plagioclase, with diorites having plagioclase containing <50 mol% An and gabbros having plagioclase containing >50 mol% An. Because this cannot be characterized during macroscopic description, we used the following convention: if a gabbroic rock contained quartz (<5%) or primary amphibole, indicating a relatively high degree of fractionation, the rock was classified as diorite. If no quartz or primary amphibole was observed, the rock was classified as gabbro. Minor modifications to the IUGS system were made to divide the rock types more accurately on the basis of significant differences rather than arbitrary cutoffs based on the abundance of a single mineral. We have attempted to follow as closely as possible the descriptions from Leg 209 (Kelemen, Kikawa, Miller, et al., 2004) and Expeditions 304/305 (Blackman, Ildefonse, John, Ohara, Miller, MacLeod, and the Expedition 304/305 Scientists, 2006) and 309/312 (Teagle, Alt, Umino, Miyashita, Banerjee, Wilson, and the Expedition 309/312 Scientists, 2006) to facilitate intersite comparison. For gabbroic rocks, the following modifiers based on modal mineralogy are used:
Additional descriptive modifiers are defined as follows:
One rock type recovered during Expedition 335 contains high proportions (85%–95%) of apparently albitic plagioclase associated with minor amounts of Fe-Ti oxides, titanite, amphibole, and epidote; quartz appears to be absent. These rocks have been classified as albitite. Volcanic rocksFor volcanic and hypabyssal rocks, we used the following definitions:
In English language usage, the term “dolerite” is European in origin and functionally equivalent to the North American usage of diabase, which is the IODP standard term. However, in Japanese, the term diabase has a distinctly different meaning, referring to strongly altered (green) basaltic rocks, and is expressed differently in Kanji script. This usage of diabase is also prevalent in Europe. We therefore agreed to use dolerite. Basalt was divided according phenocryst content, using the following convention:
If present, phenocryst phases were placed as modifiers in front of the rock name with a hyphen in between. If <1% phenocrysts is present the rock is given the modifier “aphyric.” MineralogyPlutonic rocksIn oceanic plutonic rocks, the primary rock-forming minerals are olivine, plagioclase, clinopyroxene, orthopyroxene, amphibole, Fe-Ti oxide, sulfide, and quartz. The following data are recorded in the LIMS database for each primary silicate:
The first four terms apply predominantly to subhedral or euhedral grains, the latter two generally to anhedral grains. Volcanic rocksIn volcanic and hypabyssal rocks, the groundmass, phenocrysts (if any), and vesicles were described. For the groundmass, grain size was recorded using the following definitions:
For phenocrysts, the abundance (in percent); maximum, minimum, and median grain size (in millimeters); and shape were recorded for each phase. For vesicles, abundance (in percent); vesicularity; size distribution; minimum, maximum, and modal size (in millimeters); roundness (rounded, subrounded, or well rounded); sphericity (highly spherical, moderately spherical, or slightly spherical or elongate); filling (in percent); and fill composition were documented. If vesicles are elongate, the direction is noted. ContactsFor contacts between units, the type, definition, geometry, and interpretation were described. Where the contact was not recovered this was noted. Contact types are
If contacts were characterized by combinations of the above parameters, the terms were combined (e.g., “grain size and modal contact”). Where contacts are obscured by deformation and metamorphism, they are called
Contact definitions describe how well defined a contact is, using the terms sharp, gradational, and sutured (contacts where individual mineral grains interlock across the contact). Contact geometry can be planar, curved, or irregular. Following description, contacts are interpreted as being extrusive, intrusive, or igneous. The latter term is used for contacts in plutonic rocks where the units on either side of the contact were interpreted to form part of the same igneous package (e.g., a modal contact between cumulate layers or a grain size contact in a graded sequence). The term dike refers to any sharp, well-defined, and relatively thick (>1 cm) crosscutting feature formed by injection of magma. This contrasts with igneous vein, which describes a thin (<1 cm) crosscutting feature formed by injection of magma with generally less well defined contacts. Dikes and veins are generally designated as subunits, as described above in “Igneous units and contact logs.” TextureTextures are defined on the basis of three categories: grain size, grain size distribution, and the relationships between different grains. Grain sizes were defined as follows:
For plutonic rocks, grain size distributions are classed as equigranular where all minerals are of similar size and inequigranular where grain size varies significantly. Inequigranular textures are further divided into seriate (continuous range of crystal sizes), varitextured (domains with contrasting grain size), or poikilitic (relatively large oikocrysts enclosing smaller crystals, termed chadacrysts, of one or more other minerals). For volcanic rocks, grain size distribution applies to phenocrysts only, using the terms unimodal where all phenocrysts are of similar size, bimodal where they define two size populations, or seriate where they form a continuous range of sizes. The following terms were used to describe the textural relationships between different silicate grains (Fig. F9):
Similar to silicate minerals, the textures of oxide and sulfide minerals are described in terms of grain size and their relationship to adjacent minerals. In plutonic rocks, oxides commonly occur as aggregates, and for grain size determination an aggregate is counted as a single grain. Layering, where present, is divided into modal layering and grain size layering; when neither term describes the observations well, the term “layering (other)” is used, and the nature of layering is described in the comments. In all cases, the geometry of layering is described as being sharp, gradational, or irregular. Thin section descriptionsEach thin section was photographed in both plane-polarized light (PPL) and cross-polarized light (XPL) (see TS_ORIGINAL_IMAGES_335_335(312) in IMAGES in “Supplementary material”). Thin section descriptions closely follow the procedure for macroscopic core descriptions. Where a thin section contained areas with different primary (i.e., not alteration-related) lithology, mineralogy, and/or texture, these were defined as domains (e.g., Domain 1, Domain 2, and so on). For thin sections with multiple igneous domains, a map of the domains is shown in the full thin section photomicrograph (see Fig. F10 for an example). Domains were described separately and their relative abundance was noted. The following data were recorded and entered into the LIMS database through separate tabs within the Thin Section workbook in DESClogik. Lithology and texture
Mineralogy
For plagioclase, a qualifier for zoning was recorded, using the following convention:
The type of zoning in plagioclase was also documented:
|