Heterogeneity of melts in impact deposits and implications for their origin (Riessuevite, Germany)

Susann SIEGERT1,2 and Lutz HECHT1,2
Meteoritics & Planetary Science (in Press) Link to Article [https://doi.org/10.1111/maps.13210]
1Museum f€ur Naturkunde, Leibniz-Institut f€ur Evolutions- und Biodiversitätsforschung, Invalidenstraße 43,10115, Berlin, Germany
2Freie Universität Berlin, Institut für Geologische Wissenschaften, Malteserstraße 74-100, 12249, Berlin, Germany
Published by arrangement with John Wiley & Sons

Impact melt‐bearing clastic deposits (suevites) are one of the most important records of the impact cratering process. A deeper understanding of their composition and formation is therefore essential. This study focuses on impact melt particles in suevite at Ries, Germany. Textures and chemical evidence indicate that the suevite contains three melt types that originate from different shock levels in the target. The most abundant melt type (“melt type 1”) represents well‐mixed whole‐rock melting of crystalline basement and includes incompletely mixed mafic melt schlieren (“melt type 1 mafic”). Polymineralic melt type 2 comprises mixes between monomineralic melt types 3 and melt type 1. Melt types 2 and 3 are located within melt type 1 as small patches or schlieren but also isolated within the suevite matrix. The main melt type 1 is heterogeneous with respect to trace elements, varying geographically around the crater: in the western sector, it has lower values in trace elements, e.g., Ba, Zr, Th, and Ce, than in the eastern sector. The west–east zoning likely reflects the heterogeneous nature of crystalline basement target rocks with lower trace element contents, e.g., Ba, Zr, Th, and Ce, in the west compared to the east. The chemical zoning pattern of suevite melt type 1 indicates that mixing during ejection and emplacement occurred only on a local (hundreds of meters) scale. The incomplete larger scale mixing indicated by the preservation of these local chemical signatures, and schlieren corroborate the assumption that mixing, ejection, and quenching were very rapid, short‐lived processes.

Discuss

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s