Baggott, Kaitlin, Jacobsen, Yona, Nebel, Oliver, Mulder, Jack, Raveggi, Massimo, Wang, Xue Ying, Vandenburg, Eric, Lim, Hoseong, Rogers, Angus, Etschmann, Barbara, Whitmore, Ross, Churchus, Alexandra, and Jennings, Lauren (2024) On the virtues and pitfalls of combined laser ablation Rb–Sr biotite and U–Pb monazite–zircon geochronology: an example from the isotopically disturbed Cape Woolamai Granite, SE Australia. Geological Society Special Publication, 537. pp. 435-454.

PDF (Published Version) - Published Version Restricted to Repository staff only

1

Abstract

Different mineral clocks in granite can provide age information reflecting various aspects of rock formation, including cooling or post-emplacement fluid–rock interaction. However, the dating tool chosen can yield inconclusive age information due to differences in closure temperatures and susceptibility to fluid alteration among chronometers. This has led to an inferred superiority of U–Pb in zircon over U–Pb in monazite or Rb–Sr in mica. Here, we investigate age systematics using Rb–Sr biotite grains, U–Pb in monazite and zircon in a Devonian granite from Australia. Single-grain laser ablation ICP-MS/MS biotite analyses are combined with zircon–monazite U–Pb ages and trace element systematics. Textural and trace element evidence combined with age systematics reveals a Rb–Sr closure age of c. 360–330 Ma relative to a putative 364 Ma emplacement age, suggesting hydrothermal alteration of the granite. Trace element systematics and magnetic susceptibility in biotite grains reflect their partial chemical reset and fluid overprint in the granite. However, similar systematics are also observed for zircon and monazite. Our multiple chronometer dating approach, studied with modern laser-ablation methods, highlights the need for detailed investigation of isotope and trace element systematics in single grains and that individual ages should be used cautiously when dating altered granitoids.

Actions (Repository Staff Only)

Item Control Page