Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-shngb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T08:42:30.439Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Deciphering the pressure‒temperature path in low-grade metamorphic rocks by combining crystal chemistry, thermobarometry and thermodynamic modelling: an example in the Marguareis Massif, Western Ligurian Alps, Italy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 November 2024

Edoardo Sanità
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra, Università di Pisa, Pisa, Italia
Maria Di Rosa
Affiliation:
UMR Géosciences Azur, Université de la Côte d’Azur, Nice-Sophia Antipolis, France
Jean Marc Lardeaux
Affiliation:
UMR Géosciences Azur, Université de la Côte d’Azur, Nice-Sophia Antipolis, France Centre for Lithospheric Research, Czech Geological Survey, Prague 1, 118 21, Czech Republic
Michele Marroni*
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra, Università di Pisa, Pisa, Italia Consiglio Nazionale della Ricerca, Istituto di Geoscienze e Georisorse, IGG-CNR, Pisa, Italia
Marco Tamponi
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra, Università di Pisa, Pisa, Italia
Marco Lezzerini
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra, Università di Pisa, Pisa, Italia
Luca Pandolfi
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra, Università di Pisa, Pisa, Italia
*
Corresponding author: Michele Marroni; Email: michele.marroni@unipi.it
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Unveiling the pressure‒temperature path of low-grade metamorphic rocks is challenging because of the occurrence of detrital minerals and high-variance mineral assemblages (i.e. chlorite–white mica–quartz). This paper is an attempt to reconstruct the pressure–temperature history on metapelites from a low-grade metamorphic unit, i.e. the Cabanaira Unit, located in the Marguareis Massif (Western Ligurian Alps, Italy). In order to obtain the most robust result possible, multi-equilibrium thermobarometry, forward modelling and crystallochemical index measurements are used together to reconstruct a pressure–temperature path, with consideration of the strengths and weaknesses of these methods.

This multidisciplinary approach allowed us to reconstruct the metamorphic evolution of the unit of interest, characterised by a pressure peak reached under low-temperature conditions (0.85–0.68 GPa and 250–285°C) followed by decompressional warming (low pressure–high temperature, 0.4-0.6 GPa and 300–335°C).

This pressure‒temperature path is consistent with the tectonic evolution of the investigated area proposed by previous studies, where a geological scenario in which the Cabanaira Unit experienced subduction-related processes was postulated, even if the reasons for warming remain unclear.

Multi-equilibrium thermobarometry is considered to be the most suitable method to unravel the metamorphic history of low-grade rocks, whereas forward thermodynamic modelling and the calculation of crystallochemical indexes seem to resolve only some segments of the pressure‒temperature path.

Information

Type
Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Mineralogical Society of the United Kingdom and Ireland.
Figure 0

Figure 1. (a) Geological scheme of the Western Alps-Northern Apennines (modified and re-drawn from Molli et al., 2010 and Sanità et al., 2021a). (b) Close-up of the Western Ligurian Alps (black box of a) with the related geological cross-section (c) modified by Bonini et al. (2010). (d) Simplified geological sketch (blue box of b) of the boundary between Maritime and Ligurian Alps.

Figure 1

Figure 2. (a) Geological map (modified from Sanità et al., 2021a and 2021b) of the Marguareis Massif (red box of Fig. 1d) with the related geological cross-section (b). In the map the locations of samples are reported (red dots).

Figure 2

Figure 3. Macro- to micro-scale D1 phase-related structural features. (a) F1 fold system in the Cabanaira Unit (white box of Fig. 2b). (b, c) S1 (yellow line) slaty cleavage (bottom left of b: plane polarized light, top right of b and c: crossed polarized light) marked by syn metamorphic Wm and Chl and Qz in textural equilibrium. Detrital grains of plagioclase and chlorite (c) can be observed. (d) Microphotograph of F1 hinge-zone where clear cross-cutting relationships between S1 (yellow line) and bedding (S0, white dashed line) are shown. (e) BSE image of the micro-area investigated to perform the P–T estimates (orange box of d). The white box represents the area where the local bulk composition was extracted to perform forward and inverse thermodynamic modelling. Along the S0 (white dashed line), detrital Wm and Chl (blue arrows) are indicates. Along the S1 (yellow line) neo-formed Wm and Chl crystals (red arrows in the white boxes) are present.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Composition of chlorites in ED208a sample. MgO wt.% (a) and FeO wt.% variation in the microdomain signalled in Fig. 3e. Differences exist between detrital (white dotted line) and syn-metamorphic (yellow line) Chl grains. (c) Enlarged area of the white box of (a) and (b) of the syn-metamorphic Chl (red arrows) grew along the S1 foliation (yellow line). The Al2O3 wt.% variation sheds light the complex mineral chemistry of the neo-formed grains (blue, red and green areas) corresponding to first, second and third groups (see the text). (d) AlVI/Si and (e) XMg/Si plots referred to the average compositions of the three groups of Chl detected along the S1 foliation are reported with their error bars. (f) Octahedral Fe2+ + Mg2+ (apfu, red dashed lines) content vs. Si (grey dashed lines) diagram (according to Bourdelle and Cathelineau, 2015). The blue dotted lines show the octahedral vacancy (blue empty squares) values. The four Chl end-members are also reported.

Figure 4

Table 1. Average compositions (wt.%) related to the three groups of Chl. Standard deviation is indicated

Figure 5

Figure 5. Compositions of Wm in sample ED208a. (a) SiO2 wt.% and (b) Al2O3 wt.% variation in the microdomain of Fig. 3e. Differences exist between detrital (white dotted line) and syn-metamorphic (yellow line) Wm grains. (c) Enlarged area of the white box of (a) and (b) of the syn-metamorphic Wm (light blue arrow) grew along the S1 foliation (yellow line). The Si content variation outlines a complex mineral chemistry of the syn-metamorphic Wm (blue, red and green areas) corresponding to first, second and third groups (see the text). The purple box indicates the Chl the location of chlorite crystal shown in Fig. 4c. (d) XMg/Si, (e) K/Si, and (f) AlVI/Si plots refer to the average composition of the three groups of Wm detected along the S1 foliation and include the related error bars. The orange stars indicate the theoretical compositional of muscovite. (g) AlIV/AlVI plot (according to Bousquet et al., 2002). The grey arrows indicate the solid solution trend of Wm, while the black arrows indicate the main substitution (TK: Tschermak; DT: Di-trioctahedral; PL: Pyrophyllitic).

Figure 6

Table 2. Average compositions related to the three groups of Wm. Standard deviation is indicated

Figure 7

Figure 6. Isochemical phase diagrams related to the micro-domain within the white box of Fig. 3e. (a) Phase diagram with FeOtot=Fe2+. (b) Phase diagram where 10% of FeOtot=Fe3+. Black lines mark the boundary between different stability field, whereas the red ones indicate the field where the observed mineral assemblage is found to be stable. (c, d) Isochemical phase diagrams contoured for Si (Wm) and XMg (Chl) isopleths. The LBC is reported in moles of elements at the top of the diagrams. In the grey boxes, the stable mineral assemblages relate to the different fields are indicated. The yellow area indicates the P/T space of (d) in which the measured value of Si and XMg (for Wm and Chl, respectively) match with that predicted by the model. At the bottom of each diagram, the contour legend is reported and the numbers inside the ellipses represents values of the related observed isopleth. Car: Carpholite; Ctd: Chloritoid; Grt: Garnet; Bt: Biotite; St: Staurolite; Crd: Cordierite; Hem: Hematite; Mt: Magnetite.

Figure 8

Figure 7. P–T estimate results. (a) Histograms of temperature range of Chl formation belonging to the three groups obtained with Chl-Qz-H2O. Each bar represents the counts of each chlorite whose temperature formation falls in a specific range reported along the X-axis. (b) Results of the Phg-Qz-H2O barometer. Within the P/T space the equilibrium lines Wm+Qz+H2O, together with only the hydration state (empty circles along each line) of white mica changes, are reported for each Wm groups. The XH2O values used in the model for each Wm group are also indicated. (c) P/T diagram showing the results of P–T estimates from the Chl-Phg-Qz-H2O method. Each cross indicates the pressure and temperature equilibrium condition for a single Chl-Wm couple belonging to the first, the second and the third groups. The blue, red and green boxes mark the temperature and pressure ranges of Chl and Wm formations obtained with the methods reported in a and b. Along the Y-axis, the histogram shows the results of the Massone and Schreyer (1987) barometer. Each bar represents the counting of pressure values for each pixel inside the micro-domain of Fig. 3e. (e) P/T space showing examples of all the independent (black lines) and dependent (grey lines) equilibria obtained with Chl-Phg-Qz-H2O for each Chl-Wm couple belonging to the first, the second and the third group. (e) Histograms showing the results of the Lanari et al. (2014c) geothermometer. Each bar statistically represents temperature range values of chlorite formation. (f) Diagram showing the results of the Bourdelle and Cathelineau (2015) geothermometer, where the dashed lines indicate different T ranges. Here, the plot of each average values referred to the different groups of chlorite are reported with their error bars.

Figure 9

Figure 8. Crystallochemical indices distribution. (a) WmIC distribution. (b) b0 cell parameters distribution from XRD patterns. (c) b0 values calculated using the Verdecchia et al. (2019) spreadsheet. The grey rectangular boxes represent the three T ranges independently obtained with thermobaric methods. Along Y- and X-axes the crystallochemical index distribution (coloured rectangular bars) obtained using the XRD pattern analysis is reported. The T ranges calculated by Piana et al. (2014) are reported (yellow rectangular bar along the X-axis). The shaded effect indicates that the upper limit of the range is poorly constrained with this method. The triangles, circles and squares contoured in black are referred to the calculations in which 10% of ferric iron is considered.

Figure 10

Figure 9. Diagram showing the P–T path of the Cabanaira Unit constrained in this work. The paths estimated for the Marguareis and Moglio-Testico Unit are also represented (data from Sanità et al., 2022b; 2022c). The geothermal gradients typical of subduction and collision setting are also shown. Along the X-axis the T ranges extrapolated by means Illite Crystallinity Index for the Marguareis (red rectangular bar data from Piana et al., 2014), Cabanaira (blue rectangular bar from Piana et al., 2014; orange rectangular bar from this work) and the Moglio-Testico (light blue rectangular bar from Bonazzi et al., 1987) Units are reported. The shaded effect indicates that the upper limit of the range is poorly constrained with this method. Along the Y-axis the P range yielded from b0 measurement (this work) are reported. The length of rectangular boxes represents the range of temperature and pressure estimates.

Supplementary material: File

Sanità et al. supplementary material

Sanità et al. supplementary material
Download Sanità et al. supplementary material(File)
File 2.8 MB