4.7 Article

Melting of K-rich carbonated peridotite at 6-10 GPa and the stability of K-phases in the upper mantle

Journal

CHEMICAL GEOLOGY
Volume 281, Issue 3-4, Pages 333-342

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2010.12.019

Keywords

Phase equilibrium; Partial melting; Peridotite; Experiment; Multianvil apparatus

Funding

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)
  2. Russian Academy of Sciences
  3. Russian Foundation for Basic Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Experiments are reported on melting of two peridotite compositions (depleted hazburgitic and fertile lherzolitic) with Mg and K carbonates (1.4 and 6.8 wt.% K2O in the bulk compositions). The experiments were carried out at 6-10 GPa using a multianvil apparatus. It was found that the addition of K to carbonated peridotites depresses the solidus by up to 300 degrees C at 10 GPa. As a result the solidus of K-rich carbonated peridotite intersects a cratonic geotherm at similar to 6 GPa. In addition to olivine, pyroxene, and garnet, the near-solidus mineral assemblage includes anhydrous phase X, K2Mg2Si2O7, and K-Mg carbonate, K2Mg(CO3)(2). Phase X is stable only directly near the solidus, and the stability field of the K-Mg carbonate is much wider, especially at 10 GPa (more than 200 degrees C above the solidus). Near-solidus melts in equilibrium with the K-rich crystalline phases have K-Mg carbonate compositions with up to 30 wt.% K2O and shift with increasing temperature toward dolomitic and, then, silicocarbonate kimberlite-like liquids similar to those obtained in experiments with K-poor carbonated peridotites. Thus, at low H2O activity possible crystalline hosts for K in the subcratonic upper mantle are anhydrous phase X and K-Mg carbonate. In the presence of these phases, carbonate-dominated melt must be formed in the mantle at >6 GPa even in relatively cold regions. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. 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