4.7 Article

Phosphate ages in Apollo 14 breccias: Resolving multiple impact events with high precision U-Pb SIMS analyses

Journal

GEOCHIMICA ET COSMOCHIMICA ACTA
Volume 174, Issue -, Pages 13-29

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.gca.2015.11.005

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation [2012.0097]
  2. Swedish Research Council [VR 621-2012-4370]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The U-Pb systems of apatite and merrillite grains within four separate Apollo 14 impact melt breccia samples were analysed by secondary ion mass spectrometry. No systematic difference was identified between the Pb-207/Pb-206 ages of the apatites and merrillites. A combined Pb-207/Pb-206 age of 3927 +/- 2 Ma (95% conf.) is determined for three of these samples (14305,103: 3926 +/- 4 Ma; 14306,150: 3926 +/- 6 Ma; 14314,13: 3929 +/- 4 Ma). By combining these data with the ages previously obtained for zircons in Apollo 12 impact melt breccia fragments and the lunar meteorite SaU 169, a weighted average age of 3926 +/- 2 Ma (95% conf.) is obtained, which is attributed to the formation of the Imbrium basin. An age of 3943 +/- 5 Ma is determined for the fourth breccia (14321,134), which is similar to ages of 3946 +/- 15 Ma and 3958 +/- 19 Ma, obtained from several older phosphates in 14305,103 and 14314,13. The weighted average of these three older ages is 3944 +/- 4 Ma (95% conf.). This is indistinguishable to the age (3938 +/- 4 Ma; 2 sigma) obtained for a different Apollo 14 impact melt breccia in a previous study. After investigating likely sources for this older similar to 3940 Ma age, we conclude that the Humorum or Serenitatis basin forming events are likely candidates. The potential identification of two large impact events within similar to 15 Myrs has important implications for the rate of lunar bombardment around 3.95-3.92 Ga. This study demonstrates the importance of high-precision age determinations for interpreting the impact record of the Moon, as documented in lunar samples. (c) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available