ABSTRACT Equilibrium thermodynamic modelling, quartz in garnet (QuiG) Raman geobarometry, and modelling of garnet nucleation at overstepped conditions were applied to three garnet-bearing blueschists from a 1.5 km-long transect across… Click to show full abstract
ABSTRACT Equilibrium thermodynamic modelling, quartz in garnet (QuiG) Raman geobarometry, and modelling of garnet nucleation at overstepped conditions were applied to three garnet-bearing blueschists from a 1.5 km-long transect across the eclogite-blueschist unit in Sifnos, Greece, in order to evaluate the accuracy of P‒T conditions calculated via equilibrium thermodynamics. QuiG barometry uses the Raman shift of quartz inclusions in garnet to estimate the pressure of garnet nucleation and is independent of chemical equilibrium. Garnet nucleation temperatures were estimated by determining the stability field of the palaeo-assemblage inferred from garnet inclusion suites on mineral assemblage diagrams calculated in the MnNCKFMASH system and on temperatures obtained from Zr in rutile thermometry. These conditions were then compared to P‒T conditions calculated at the equilibrium garnet isograd, and the method of intersecting isopleths. The P‒T conditions calculated with intersecting garnet isopleths over- and underestimated the temperature of nucleation in samples SPH99-1a and SPH99-7, respectively, whereas they significantly underestimated nucleation pressure in SPH99-5. Nucleation of garnet in SPH99-1a at 12 kbar and ~484°C requires overstepping of ~6 kbar and a reaction affinity of 2.2 kJ mol‒1 O. SPH99-5 requires overstepping of ~8 kbar with garnet reaction affinities of at least 2.0 kJ mol‒1 O at 15 kbar and ~520°C. SPH99-7 requires overstepping of approximately 15 kbar and affinities of about 2.0–2.4 kJ mol‒1 O at ~23 kbar and ~530°C. The geotherms calculated from SPH99-7 (~6.7°C km‒1) and SPH99-5 (9.8°C km‒1) are in accordance with previous studies. The geotherm calculated from SPH99-1a, however, is warmer (11.3°C km‒1), and could reflect changes in the rate of subduction or differences in structural position within the down-going slab. The 10 kbar pressure difference between SPH99-7 and SPH99-1a can be explained by thrusting and accretion of thin slices of underplated wedge material facilitated by slab rollback and gravitational collapse.
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.