27 research outputs found

    Tectonics of the Isua Supracrustal Belt 2: Microstructures Reveal Distributed Strain in the Absence of Major Fault Structures

    No full text
    Archean geological records are increasingly interpreted to indicate a ≤3.2 Ga initiation of plate tectonics on Earth. This hypothesis contrasts with dominant plate tectonic interpretations for the Eoarchean (ca. 4.0–3.6 Ga) Isua supracrustal belt (southwest Greenland). Alternatively, recent work shows the belt could have formed via heat-pipe tectonics. Predicted strain distributions across the belt vary between models. Plate tectonic models predict a dominant unidirectional shear sense, corresponding to subduction vergence, and strain localization within ∼10-m-scale shear zones. In contrast, the proposed heat-pipe model predicts two opposing shear senses, corresponding to opposite limbs of 0.1-m to km-scale a-type folds (i.e., sheath and curtain folds), with relatively equal strain distributed across the belt. Here, we present the first microstructure study using thin-section petrography and electron backscatter diffraction analysis on quartz of oriented samples from throughout the Isua supracrustal belt. Key findings are: (1) the Eoarchean Isua supracrustal belt was deformed at ∼500°C–650°C, with potential postdeformational recovery at similar or lower temperatures, (2) the spatial distribution of the two opposing shear senses which dominate the belt (top-to-southeast and top-to-northwest) appears to be random, and (3) the strain intensity across the belt appears to be quasiuniform as evidenced by the uniformly low (mostly <0.1) M-indexes of quartz fabrics, such that no ≤ 100 -m-scale shear zones can be detected. Our findings are only consistent with the predictions of the heat-pipe model and do not require plate tectonics, so the geology of the belt is compatible with a ≤3.2 Ga initiation of plate tectonics

    Tectonics of the Isua Supracrustal Belt 1: P‐T‐X‐d Constraints of a Poly‐Metamorphic Terrane

    No full text
    The Eoarchean Isua supracrustal belt (ISB) has been interpreted as one of the earliest records of subduction processes, leading to the conclusion that a plate tectonic geodynamic system was likely operating since the early Archean. However, proposed tectonic models remain difficult to evaluate as our understanding of the metamorphic and structural evolution remains fragmentary. Here, we present a metamorphic study of the supracrustal rocks of the ISB. We used petrographic and microstructural observations, phase equilibria, isopleth geothermobarometry, and conventional thermometry to explore the prograde, peak, and retrograde metamorphic evolution of the northeastern ISB. Our results show that the ISB records a syn‐tectonic, amphibolite facies metamorphic event (M1) with peak conditions of 550°C–600°C and 0.5–0.7 GPa. M1 was followed by a static, lower amphibolite facies metamorphic event (M2; 3.5 Ga) and the Neoarchean (<2.9 Ga), respectively. These events are partially overprinted by late low temperature (<500°C) retrogression (M3) that is most intensely developed in the northeastern part of the belt; it typically overprints some peak mineral phases while preserving the peak fabric. Our findings are consistent with spatially homogeneous syn‐tectonic amphibolite facies metamorphism and macroscale folding. Such features are predicted by a heat‐pipe tectonic model. Therefore, our findings permit the interpretation of the ISB as a record of early nonuniformitarian tectonic processes

    Reply to Comment by A.P. Nutman et al. on “Tectonics of the Isua Supracrustal Belt 1: P-T-X-d Constraints of a Poly-Metamorphic Terrane” by A. Ramírez-Salazar et al. and “Tectonics of the Isua Supracrustal Belt 2: Microstructures Reveal Distributed Strain in the Absence of Major Fault Structures” by J. Zuo et al.

    No full text
    Structural and metamorphic analyses from the works under discussion (Ramírez-Salazar et al., 2021, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020tc006516; Zuo et al., 2021, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020tc006514) show that the Isua supracrustal rocks can be interpreted to record one single deformation and metamorphic event featuring quasi-homogeneous deformation and amphibolite facies metamorphism, followed by late static retrogression or thermal event(s). Observed deformation and metamorphic records are consistent with three hypotheses: (a) they represent Neoarchean plate tectonic overprints following Eoarchean plate tectonic evolution (e.g., Nutman et al., 2022, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021TC007036); (b) they represent Eoarchean heat-pipe and/or plate tectonic deformation that survived later tectonic event(s) (e.g., Ramírez-Salazar et al., 2021, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020tc006516; Zuo et al., 2021, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020tc006514), and; (c) they represent one major Neoarchean tectonic event, such that the Isua supracrustal belt (ISB) records Eoarchean protolith-related processes but does not record Eoarchean metamorphism nor deformation. While a heat-pipe model for crustal formation is central to hypothesis 2, it is also a viable crustal formation mechanism for hypothesis 3 where the ISB would still form in a heat-pipe setting in Eoarchean time, but the major deformation of the heat-pipe lithosphere happened during Neoarchean time, probably by (proto-)plate tectonic processes. If the data presented in Zuo et al. (2021), https://doi.org/10.1029/2020tc006514 and Ramírez-Salazar et al. (2021), https://doi.org/10.1029/2020tc006516 only reflect Neoarchean histories, then these cannot be used to refute or support any Eoarchean geodynamic background for the formation of the ISB

    Earth’s earliest phaneritic ultramafic rocks: Mantle slices or crustal cumulates?

    No full text
    When plate tectonics initiated remains uncertain, partly because many signals interpreted as diagnostic of plate tectonics can be alternatively explained via hot stagnant-lid tectonics. One such signal involves the petrogenesis of early Archean phaneritic ultramafic rocks. In the Eoarchean Isua supracrustal belt (Greenland), some phaneritic ultramafic rocks have been dominantly interpreted as subduction-related, tectonically-exhumed mantle slices or cumulates. Here, we compared Eoarchean phaneritic ultramafic rocks from the Isua supracrustal belt with mantle peridotites, cumulates, and phaneritic ultramafic samples from the Paleoarchean East Pilbara Terrane (Australia), which is widely interpreted to have formed in non-plate tectonic settings. Our findings show that Pilbara samples have cumulate and polygonal textures, melt-enriched trace element patterns, relative enrichment of Os, Ir, and Ru versus Pt and Pd, and chromite-spinel with variable TiO2 and Mg#, and relatively consistent Cr#. Both, new and existing data show that cumulates and mantle rocks potentially have similar whole-rock geochemical characteristics, deformation fabrics, and alteration features. Geochemical modeling results indicate that Isua and Pilbara ultramafic rocks have interacted with low-Pt and Pd melts generated by sequestration of Pd and Pt into sulphide and/or alloy during magmatism. Such melts cannot have interacted with a mantle wedge. Correspondingly, geochemical compositions and rock textures suggest that Isua and Pilbara ultramafic rocks are not tectonically-exhumed mantle peridotites, but are cumulates that experienced metasomatism by fluids and co-genetic melts. Because such rocks could have formed in either plate or non-plate tectonic settings, they cannot be used to differentiate early Earth tectonic settings
    corecore