Age, composition, and source of the Macururé Mafic Suite, Southern Borborema Province, Brazil

Pereira, Fábio dos Santos; Rosa, Maria de Lourdes da Silva; Conceição, Herbet; Bertotti, Anelise Losangela

doi:10.1590/2317-4889202020190105

Fábio dos Santos Pereira ^**Corresponding author.

Programa de Pós-Graduação em Geociências e Análise de Bacias, Universidade Federal de Sergipe - São Cristóvão (SE), Brazil. E-mails: fabio.santos.pereira@hotmail.com, lrosa@ufs.br, herbet@ufs.br

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8496-6501

Maria de Lourdes da Silva Rosa

Programa de Pós-Graduação em Geociências e Análise de Bacias, Universidade Federal de Sergipe - São Cristóvão (SE), Brazil. E-mails: fabio.santos.pereira@hotmail.com, lrosa@ufs.br, herbet@ufs.br

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5099-829X

Herbet Conceição

Programa de Pós-Graduação em Geociências e Análise de Bacias, Universidade Federal de Sergipe - São Cristóvão (SE), Brazil. E-mails: fabio.santos.pereira@hotmail.com, lrosa@ufs.br, herbet@ufs.br

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9172-4519

Anelise Losangela Bertotti

Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - Recife (PE), Brazil. E-mail: aneber79@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2222-6660

*Corresponding author.

F.S.P. carried out the geological mapping and sampling, wrote the manuscript and prepared all figures and tables. M.L.S.R. performed the geochemical and geochronological analyses, revised the manuscript and contributed with petrological interpretations. H.C. contributed with the field works, petrographic descriptions and improved the manuscript with revisions and suggestions. A.L.B. helped with geological mapping and sampling.

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures (12)
Tables (2)

Thumbnail

Figure 1.
Geological context. (A) Pre-drift reconstruction of South America-Africa showing the location of Borborema Province (BP) and Amazonian (AC), West-Africa (WSC) and São Francisco-Congo cratons (SFC). (B) Subdivision of Borborema Province in Northern (NS), Central (SC) and Southern (SS) subprovinces, limited by the shear zones systems Patos (PSZ) and Pernambuco (PESZ), according to Van Schmus et al. (2008Van Schmus W.R., Oliveira E.P., Silva Filho A.F., Toteu S.F., Penaye J., Guimarães I.P. 2008. Proterozoic links between the Borborema Province, NE Brazil, and the Central African Fold Belt. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 294(1):69-99. https://doi.org/10.1144/SP294.5
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1144/... ). (C) Simplified geological map of the area outlined in (B) showing the tectonic compartmentation of the Sergipano Orogenic System according to Davison and Santos (1989Davison I., Santos R.A. 1989. Tectonic evolution of the Sergipano Fold Belt, NE Brazil, during the Brasiliano Orogeny. Precambrian Research, 45(4):319-342. https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-9268(89)90068-5
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/... ). The rectangle shows the location of the study area.

Thumbnail

Figure 2.
Simplified geological map of study area indicating the location of the Dores (1), Capela (2), Aquidabã (3), Campo Grande (4), Camará (5), and Pedra Branca (6) stocks. Presented U-Pb crystallization ages from Bueno et al. (2009Bueno J.F., Oliveira E.P., McNaughton N.J., Laux J.H. 2009. U-Pb dating of granites in the Neoproterozoic Sergipano Belt, NE-Brazil: implications for the timing and duration of continental collision and extrusion tectonics in the Borborema Province. Gondwana Research, 15(1):86-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GR.2008.06.003
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/... ) and Santos et al. (2019Santos I.S., Conceição H., Rosa M.L.S., Marinho M.M. 2019. Magmatismos shoshonítico e cálcio-alcalino de alto potássio pós-orogênico (615 Ma) na porção leste do Domínio Macururé, Sistema Orogênico Sergipano: Stocks Propriá, Amparo do São Francisco e Fazenda Alvorada. Geologia USP. Série Científica, 19(1):9-116. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2316-9095.v19-141362
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.11606... ).

Thumbnail

Figure 3.
Field and petrographic aspects. (A) Macroscopic texture of plagioclase-bearing biotite hornblendite. (B) Cumulate texture in hornblendite, with plagioclase into interstices between amphibole and biotite crystals. (C) Chessboard subgrains texture in quartz. (D) Equigranular garnet-bearing hornblende-biotite quartz diorite. (E) Mafic clots composed of biotite, amphibole, and clinopyroxene. (F) Subhedral garnet showing inclusions of biotite. (G) Equigranular biotite-hornblende quartz gabbro. (H) Plagioclase displaying inclusion trails between different zones. (I) Secondary substitution of hornblende by biotite along to cleavage planes. (J) Inequigranular biotite-hornblende quartz diorite. (K) Biotite crystal with kink bands. (L) Subhedral magmatic epidote with allanite core, partially reabsorbed in contact zone with quartz.

Thumbnail

Figure 4.
Cathodoluminescence images and ²⁰⁶Pb/²³⁸U ages for analyzed zircon crystals from Capela, Aquidabã and Campo Grande stocks. Red circles indicate the spot location and have about 30 µm.

Thumbnail

Figure 5.
Concordia diagrams showing the U-Pb ages for Capela (A), Aquidabã (B), and Campo Grande (C) stocks.

Thumbnail

Figure 6.
Geochemical diagrams applied to studied rocks. (A) Total alkali versus silica (Le Bas et al. 1986Le Bas M.J., Maitre R.W.L., Streckeisen A., Zanettin B. 1986. A chemical classification of volcanic rocks based on the total alkali-silica diagram. Journal of Petrology, 27(3):745-750. https://doi.org/10.1093/petrology/27.3.745
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/... ) with the demarcation of subalkaline and alkaline series according to Irvine and Baragar (1971Irvine T.N., Baragar W.R.A. 1971. A Guide to the chemical classification of the common volcanic rocks. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 8(5):523-548. https://doi.org/10.1139/e71-055
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1139/... ). (B) AFM diagram (Irvine & Baragar 1971) showing the fields of cumulate and non-cumulate mafic-ultramafic rocks related to arc environments (Beard 1986Beard J.S. 1986. Characteristic mineralogy of arc-related cumulate gabbros: Implications for the tectonic setting of gabbroic plutons and for andesite genesis. Geology, 14(10):848-851. https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613(1986)14<848:CMOACG>2.0.CO;2
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1130/... ). (C) (Na₂O + K₂O - CaO) versus SiO₂ and (D) FeOt / (FeOt + MgO) versus SiO₂ with Cordilleran granitoids area defined by Frost et al. (2001Frost B.R., Barnes C.G., Collins W.J., Arculus R.J., Ellis D.J., Frost C.D. 2001. A geochemical classification for granitic rocks. Journal of Petrology, 42(11):2033-2048. https://doi.org/10.1093/petrology/42.11.2033
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/... ). (E) Na₂O versus K₂O (Turner et al. 1996Turner S., Arnaud N., Liu J., Rogers N., Hawkesworth C., Harris N., Kelley S., Van Calsteren P., Deng W. 1996. Post-collision, shoshonitic volcanism on the Tibetan plateau: implications for convective thinning of the lithosphere and the source of ocean island basalts. Journal of Petrology, 37(1):45-71. https://doi.org/10.1093/petrology/37.1.45
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/... ). (F) Ta/Yb versus Ce/Yb (Pearce 1982Pearce J.A. 1982. Trace element characteristics of lavas from destructive plate boundaries. In: Thorpe R.S. (ed.). Orogenic Andesites and Related Rocks. Chichester, John Wiley and Sons, p. 528-548.).

Thumbnail

Figure 7.
Bivariate diagrams using SiO₂ as differentiation index. Fields of tholeiite, calc-alkaline, high-K calc-alkaline, and shoshonite series in (E) according to Peccerillo and Taylor (1976Peccerillo A., Taylor S.R. 1976. Geochemistry of Eocene calc-alkaline volcanic rocks from the Kastamonu area, Northern Turkey. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 58(1):63-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00384745
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/... ). (F) Alumina saturation index of Shand (1943Shand S.J. 1943. The Eruptive Rocks. 2nd Ed. New York, John Wiley, 444 p.) defined as the molar ratio Al₂O₃ / (CaO + Na₂O + K₂O) and limit between S- and I-type granites equal to 1.1 (Chappell & White 2001Chappell B.W., White A.J.R. 2001. Two contrasting granite types: 25 years later. Australian Journal of Earth Sciences, 48(4):489-499. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-0952.2001.00882.x
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1046/... ). Isotherms in (G) and (H) are from respectively Green and Pearson (1986Green T.H., Pearson N.J. 1986. Ti-rich accessory phase saturation in hydrous mafic-felsic compositions at high P, T. Chemical Geology, 54(3-4):185-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2541(86)90136-1
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/... ) and Green and Watson (1982Green T.H., Watson E.B. 1982. Crystallization of apatite in natural magmas under high pressure, hydrous conditions, with particular reference to “orogenic” rock series. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 79(1):96-105. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00376966
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/... ).

Thumbnail

Figure 8.
Chondrite-normalized REE (Nakamura 1974Nakamura N. 1974. Determination of REE, Ba, Fe, Mg, Na and K in carbonaceous and ordinary chondrites. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 38(5):757-775. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-7037(74)90149-5
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/... ) and multielement (Thompson 1982Thompson R.N. 1982. Magmatism of the British Tertiary Volcanic Province. Scottish Journal of Geology, 18(1):50-107. https://doi.org/10.1144/sjg18010049
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1144/... ) patterns. Trace elements composition of N-MORB, E-MORB, OIB (Sun & McDonough 1989Sun S.-S., McDonough W.F. 1989. Chemical and isotopic systematics of oceanic basalts: implications for mantle composition and processes. In: Saunders A.D., Norry M.J. (eds.), Magmatism in the Ocean Basins. London, Geological Society of London, Special Publications, 42, p. 313-345. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1989.042.01.19
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1144/... ), continental arc andesite (Kelemen et al. 2007Kelemen P.B., Hanghøj K., Greene A.R. 2007. One view of the geochemistry of subduction-related magmatic arcs, with an emphasis on primitive andesite and lower crust. Treatise on Geochemistry, 3:1-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-043751-6/03035-8
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/... ) and post-orogenic shoshonitic andesite (Pe-Piper et al. 2009Pe-Piper G., Piper D.J.W., Koukouvelas I., Dolansky L.M., Kokkalas S. 2009. Postorogenic shoshonitic rocks and their origin by melting underplated basalts: The Miocene of Limnos, Greece. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 121(1-2):39-54. https://doi.org/10.1130/B26317.1
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1130/... ) are displayed as comparison. Square symbols correspond to data from Santos (2014Santos L.O. 2014. Estudo petrográfico e geoquímico dos corpos gabróico-graníticos de Capela e Dores, Domínio Macururé, Cinturão Sergipano. Universidade Federal de Sergipe, São Cristóvão, 85 p.).

Thumbnail

Figure 9.
Tectonic environments discrimination diagrams. (A) Th - Hf/3 - Nb/16 (Wood 1980Wood D.A. 1980. The application of a Th-Hf-Ta diagram to problems of tectonomagmatic classification and to establishing the nature of crustal contamination of basaltic lavas of the British Tertiary Volcanic Province. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 50(1):11-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/0012-821X(80)90116-8
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/... ) for samples with SiO₂ < 52%. (B) Yb versus Ta (Pearce et al. 1984Pearce J.A., Harris N.B.W., Tindle A.G. 1984. Trace element discrimination diagrams for the tectonic interpretation of granitic rocks. Journal of Petrology, 25(4):956-983. https://doi.org/10.1093/petrology/25.4.956
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/... ) for silica-oversaturated samples. (C) Zr/TiO₂ versus Ce/P₂O₅ for samples within the compositional ranges proposed by Müller et al. (1992Müller D., Rock N.M.S., Groves D.I. 1992. Geochemical discrimination between shoshonitic and potassic volcanic rocks in different tectonic settings: a pilot study. Mineralogy and Petrology, 46(4):259-289. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01173568
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/... ).

Thumbnail

Figure 10.
Nature of the source. (A) La/Yb versus Nb/La (Smith et al. 1999Smith E.I., Sánchez A., Walker J.D., Wang K. 1999. Geochemistry of mafic magmas in the Hurricane Volcanic Field, Utah: implications for small‐ and large‐scale chemical variability of the lithospheric mantle. The Journal of Geology, 107(4):433-448. https://doi.org/10.1086/314355
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1086/... ). (B) Nb/Yb versus Th/Yb (Pearce 2008Pearce J.A. 2008. Geochemical fingerprinting of oceanic basalts with applications to ophiolite classification and the search for Archean oceanic crust. Lithos, 100(1-4):14-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LITHOS.2007.06.016
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/... ) showing within-plate (WP) and subduction zone (SZ) enrichment vectors. Fields of continental and oceanic arcs are from Pearce (2014Pearce J.A. 2014. Immobile Element Fingerprinting of Ophiolites. Elements, 10(2):101-108. https://doi.org/10.2113/gselements.10.2.101
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2113/... ). (C) Ba/Rb versus Rb/Sr (Furman & Graham 1999Furman T., Graham D. 1999. Erosion of lithospheric mantle beneath the East African Rift system: geochemical evidence from the Kivu volcanic province. Lithos, 48(1-4):237-262. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-4937(99)00031-6
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/... ) with an area of the common lithospheric mantle (CLM). (D) Sr/Nd versus Th/Yb (Woodhead et al. 1998Woodhead J.D., Eggins S.M., Johnson R.W. 1998. Magma genesis in the New Britain Island Arc: further insights into melting and mass transfer processes. Journal of Petrology, 39(9):1641-1668. https://doi.org/10.1093/petroj/39.9.1641
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/... ) with enrichment tendencies related to sediments and fluids. Values of N-MORB, E-MORB, OIB and primitive mantle (PM) according to Sun and McDonough (1989Sun S.-S., McDonough W.F. 1989. Chemical and isotopic systematics of oceanic basalts: implications for mantle composition and processes. In: Saunders A.D., Norry M.J. (eds.), Magmatism in the Ocean Basins. London, Geological Society of London, Special Publications, 42, p. 313-345. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1989.042.01.19
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1144/... ). Global subducting sediment (GLOSS) composition from Plank (2014Plank T. 2014. The chemical composition of subducting sediments. Treatise on Geochemistry, 4:607-629. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-095975-7.00319-3
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/... ). In (A), (C) and (D) were used only the samples with MgO > 5 wt.%.

Thumbnail

Figure 11.
Fractional crystallization trends of amphibole (Amp), biotite (Bt), clinopyroxene (Cpx), orthopyroxene (Opx), orthoclase (Or), and plagioclase (Pl). Partition coefficients were compiled from Rollinson (1993Rollinson H. 1993. Using geochemical data: evaluation, presentation, interpretation. London, Routledge, 384 p.). Evolutive tendencies by fractional crystallization (FC) and partial melting (PM) correspond to red dashed arrows in (A).

Thumbnail

Figure 12.
Granite compositions from Capela stock plotted in the Al₂O₃/FeOt+MgO - 3CaO - 5K₂O/Na₂O diagram (Laurent et al. 2014Laurent O., Martin H., Moyen J.F., Doucelance R. 2014. The diversity and evolution of late-Archean granitoids: evidence for the onset of “modern-style” plate tectonics between 3.0 and 2.5 Ga. Lithos, 205:208-235. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LITHOS.2014.06.012
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/... ). The fields represent the composition of melts derived from tonalites, metasediments, low- and high-K mafic protoliths.

Thumbnail

Table 1.
SHRIMP U-Pb zircon data from Capela, Aquidabã, and Campo Grande stocks.

Thumbnail

Table 2.
Major and trace elements of representative samples from Dores (1), Capela (2), Aquidabã (3), Campo Grande (4), Camará (5), and Pedra Branca (6) stocks.

Figure 10. Nature of the source. (A) La/Yb versus Nb/La (Smith et al. 1999Smith E.I., Sánchez A., Walker J.D., Wang K. 1999. Geochemistry of mafic magmas in the Hurricane Volcanic Field, Utah: implications for small‐ and large‐scale chemical variability of the lithospheric mantle. The Journal of Geology, 107(4):433-448. https://doi.org/10.1086/314355
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1086/... ). (B) Nb/Yb versus Th/Yb (Pearce 2008Pearce J.A. 2008. Geochemical fingerprinting of oceanic basalts with applications to ophiolite classification and the search for Archean oceanic crust. Lithos, 100(1-4):14-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LITHOS.2007.06.016
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/... ) showing within-plate (WP) and subduction zone (SZ) enrichment vectors. Fields of continental and oceanic arcs are from Pearce (2014Pearce J.A. 2014. Immobile Element Fingerprinting of Ophiolites. Elements, 10(2):101-108. https://doi.org/10.2113/gselements.10.2.101
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2113/... ). (C) Ba/Rb versus Rb/Sr (Furman & Graham 1999Furman T., Graham D. 1999. Erosion of lithospheric mantle beneath the East African Rift system: geochemical evidence from the Kivu volcanic province. Lithos, 48(1-4):237-262. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-4937(99)00031-6
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/... ) with an area of the common lithospheric mantle (CLM). (D) Sr/Nd versus Th/Yb (Woodhead et al. 1998Woodhead J.D., Eggins S.M., Johnson R.W. 1998. Magma genesis in the New Britain Island Arc: further insights into melting and mass transfer processes. Journal of Petrology, 39(9):1641-1668. https://doi.org/10.1093/petroj/39.9.1641
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/... ) with enrichment tendencies related to sediments and fluids. Values of N-MORB, E-MORB, OIB and primitive mantle (PM) according to Sun and McDonough (1989Sun S.-S., McDonough W.F. 1989. Chemical and isotopic systematics of oceanic basalts: implications for mantle composition and processes. In: Saunders A.D., Norry M.J. (eds.), Magmatism in the Ocean Basins. London, Geological Society of London, Special Publications, 42, p. 313-345. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1989.042.01.19
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1144/... ). Global subducting sediment (GLOSS) composition from Plank (2014Plank T. 2014. The chemical composition of subducting sediments. Treatise on Geochemistry, 4:607-629. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-095975-7.00319-3
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/... ). In (A), (C) and (D) were used only the samples with MgO > 5 wt.%.

ID Spot	% ²⁰⁶Pb^a	U (ppm)	Th (ppm)	²³² Th/ ²³⁸ U ^b	Isotope ratios^c							Ages (Ma)
ID Spot	% ²⁰⁶Pb^a	U (ppm)	Th (ppm)	²³² Th/ ²³⁸ U ^b	²⁰⁷ Pb/ ²⁰⁶ Pb	1σ (%)	²⁰⁷ Pb/ ²³⁵ U	1σ (%)	²⁰⁶ Pb/ ²³⁸ U	1σ (%)	Rho^d	²⁰⁶ Pb/ ²³⁸ U (1σ)	²⁰⁷ Pb/ ²⁰⁶ Pb (1σ)	% Disc^e
Capela stock
1.1	0.03	677	231	0.35	0.06044	0.9	0.86570	1.3	0.10388	1.0	0.735	637 ± 6	619 ± 19	-3
2.1	0.00	353	150	0.44	0.06063	0.7	0.86454	1.3	0.10342	1.0	0.823	634 ± 6	626 ± 15	-1
3.1	0.03	147	90	0.63	0.06007	1.2	0.85572	1.7	0.10332	1.3	0.734	634 ± 8	606 ± 26	-5
4.1	0.12	308	157	0.53	0.06019	1.0	0.83352	1.6	0.10044	1.2	0.783	617 ± 7	610 ± 21	-1
5.1^†	0.04	236	155	0.68	0.05940	0.9	0.83701	1.2	0.10220	0.8	0.678	627 ± 5	582 ± 20	-8
6.1	0.00	418	314	0.78	0.05993	0.7	0.84057	1.2	0.10173	1.0	0.839	625 ± 6	601 ± 14	-4
7.1	0.05	198	69	0.36	0.06068	1.1	0.86526	1.4	0.10342	0.9	0.635	634 ± 5	628 ± 23	-1
8.1	0.04	397	221	0.58	0.06059	0.7	0.86709	1.1	0.10380	0.8	0.743	637 ± 5	625 ± 16	-2
9.1	0.06	221	154	0.72	0.06029	1.0	0.84742	1.5	0.10194	1.2	0.748	626 ± 7	614 ± 22	-2
10.1	0.04	491	544	1.14	0.06095	0.6	0.86434	1.0	0.10284	0.8	0.785	631 ± 5	638 ± 14	1
11.1	0.03	170	97	0.59	0.06189	1.1	0.88786	1.7	0.10404	1.3	0.755	638 ± 8	670 ± 24	5
12.1	0.03	281	219	0.80	0.06100	0.9	0.86949	1.2	0.10338	0.8	0.695	634 ± 5	639 ± 19	1
Aquidabã stock
1.1	0.07	124	102	0.85	0.06066	1.3	0.87963	1.6	0.10518	1.0	0.586	645 ± 6	627 ± 28	-3
2.1	0.02	204	201	1.02	0.06054	0.9	0.86972	1.3	0.10419	0.9	0.672	639 ± 5	623 ± 20	-3
3.1	0.04	103	80	0.81	0.06107	1.4	0.86382	2.0	0.10258	1.4	0.722	630 ± 9	642 ± 29	2
3.2	0.07	120	95	0.81	0.06082	2.0	0.88101	2.4	0.10506	1.2	0.494	644 ± 7	633 ± 44	-2
4.1	0.10	143	124	0.89	0.06063	1.3	0.86710	1.6	0.10373	0.9	0.560	636 ± 5	626 ± 29	-2
5.1	0.09	101	77	0.78	0.06108	1.6	0.85720	2.0	0.10179	1.2	0.610	625 ± 7	642 ± 34	3
6.1	0.06	215	211	1.02	0.06061	1.0	0.86537	1.3	0.10356	0.9	0.652	635 ± 5	625 ± 21	-2
7.1	0.10	196	183	0.96	0.06052	1.2	0.86048	1.5	0.10312	0.9	0.592	633 ± 5	622 ± 26	-2
8.1	0.09	157	147	0.97	0.06069	1.3	0.86100	1.6	0.10289	0.9	0.571	631 ± 5	628 ± 27	-1
9.1	0.13	70	48	0.70	0.06065	2.0	0.86344	2.2	0.10325	1.0	0.460	633 ± 6	627 ± 43	-1
10.1	0.04	112	96	0.89	0.06116	2.1	0.89487	2.3	0.10612	1.0	0.423	650 ± 6	645 ± 46	-1
Campo Grande stock
1.1	0.14	573	231	0.42	0.06053	1.8	0.85672	2.1	0.10266	1.1	0.515	630 ± 6	622 ± 39	-1
2.1	0.94	320	58	0.19	0.06030	2.9	0.82719	3.1	0.09949	1.0	0.318	611 ± 6	614 ± 63	1
3.1^†	0.50	1097	328	0.31	0.06115	0.9	0.73117	2.3	0.08672	2.1	0.918	536 ± 11	644 ± 20	18
4.1	0.03	1029	195	0.20	0.06081	0.7	0.88809	1.3	0.10593	1.1	0.843	649 ± 7	632 ± 15	-3
5.1^†	0.34	669	210	0.32	0.06535	1.1	1.17154	2.5	0.13002	2.2	0.894	788 ± 16	786 ± 23	0
6.1^†	0.14	387	90	0.24	0.06560	1.0	1.14537	1.9	0.12664	1.6	0.846	769 ± 12	794 ± 22	3
7.1	0.01	2595	526	0.21	0.06023	0.4	0.84084	1.2	0.10126	1.1	0.932	622 ± 7	612 ± 9	-2
7.2	0.06	443	225	0.53	0.06108	1.1	0.87712	1.6	0.10415	1.1	0.716	639 ± 7	642 ± 24	1
8.1^†	0.34	2248	418	0.19	0.05907	1.1	0.68542	2.0	0.08415	1.7	0.835	521 ± 8	570 ± 24	9
9.1	0.12	476	283	0.61	0.06158	1.2	0.93284	3.6	0.10986	3.3	0.939	672 ± 21	660 ± 26	-2
10.1	0.05	596	188	0.33	0.06066	0.9	0.87327	1.4	0.10441	1.1	0.796	640 ± 7	627 ± 18	-2
11.1^†	6.52	176	70	0.41	0.18801	0.9	10.74883	2.6	0.41466	2.5	0.946	2,236 ± 47	2,725 ± 14	21

Sample Unit	AVG-1^a	±	AVG-1^b	±	abs error^c	910	913	696F	919B	930B	940	700	624	504A	593	591B	633
Sample Unit	AVG-1^a	±	AVG-1^b	±	abs error^c	1	1	2	2	2	2	3	4	5	5	5	6
Major elements (wt.%) by XRF
SiO₂	58.84	0.58	59.32	0.34	0.48	59.54	58.46	41.47	55.09	45.28	50.66	54.30	59.30	50.95	59.30	68.58	57.10
TiO₂	1.05	0.05	1.05	0.05	0.00	0.80	0.81	2.29	0.62	1.61	1.35	1.17	0.72	1.46	0.88	0.58	0.80
Al₂O₃	17.15	0.34	17.61	0.43	0.46	15.54	15.61	13.21	14.13	12.19	15.50	15.50	16.90	18.48	15.06	14.99	15.05
Fe₂O₃	6.77	0.19	6.57	0.13	0.20	7.21	7.65	18.28	9.33	17.67	10.94	9.63	5.80	10.35	7.07	3.67	6.50
MnO	0.09	0.006	0.09	0.008	0.00	0.08	0.09	0.16	0.13	0.18	0.15	0.12	0.09	0.13	0.11	0.04	0.11
MgO	1.53	0.093	1.34	0.096	0.19	3.69	4.24	9.75	8.77	9.95	5.51	7.44	2.58	4.06	5.24	1.94	4.99
CaO	4.94	0.14	5.07	0.21	0.13	5.56	5.40	10.23	6.68	8.35	7.12	5.50	4.92	6.46	5.05	3.23	5.00
Na₂O	4.26	0.12	4.13	0.23	0.13	2.69	2.70	1.78	2.08	1.17	2.48	2.90	3.78	3.27	3.05	3.59	3.26
K₂O	2.92	0.37	3.07	0.40	0.15	3.26	3.44	2.15	2.44	2.46	3.01	2.67	2.75	3.02	2.75	2.20	2.29
P₂O₅	0.50	0.03	0.59	0.06	0.09	0.33	0.35	0.70	0.30	1.19	0.62	0.36	0.29	0.55	0.21	0.17	0.22
LOI	-	-	-	-	-	0.48	0.34	1.34	0.77	0.94	0.29	1.16	1.25	-	-	-	1.32
Total	98.05	-	98.84	-	-	99.18	99.09	101.36	100.34	100.99	97.63	100.75	98.38	98.73	98.72	98.99	96.64
Trace elements (ppm) by ICP-MS
Ba						844	1105	693	363	816	1145	642	1140	1327	991	588	873
Rb						101.5	99.9	42.6	64.7	64.4	73.5	75.9	99.5	118.8	92.9	94.6	81.8
Sr						411	432	315	567	145	522	435	719	730	424	421	464
Cs						3.55	5.43	2.26	2.47	1.83	2.89	4.37	2.76	3.60	3.70	3.10	3.78
Ga						25.2	24.1	24.2	23.2	26.3	22.6	23.1	23.2	26.7	21.0	19.1	23.4
U						1.81	1.67	0.67	1.20	0.89	1.35	2.06	2.37	2.30	1.20	2.70	1.51
Th						12.20	10.15	2.73	5.08	3.83	5.69	8.67	15.95	19.20	7.80	34.10	6.17
Nb						14.2	11.5	9.0	8.7	11.9	13.1	7.4	10.2	13.6	8.6	11.0	7.3
Ta						0.9	0.8	0.5	0.6	0.5	0.8	0.5	0.6	0.4	0.6	0.5	0.4
Zr						243	239	173	171	55	239	176	273	397	205	301	173
Hf						7.1	6.9	5.7	4.9	2.7	6.0	4.6	8.1	9.9	5.6	9.0	5.0
V						118	143	418	187	551	235	163	89	172	139	64	128
Cr						60	200	160	870	590	250	540	200	-	-	-	430
La						42.9	42.0	22.2	28.8	32.0	38.9	25.7	52.6	87.7	32.0	86.9	29.1
Ce						85.5	95.1	67.8	64.5	95.0	84.2	62.2	105.5	204.3	69.4	170.9	59.7
Pr						9.54	9.68	10.15	7.81	14.45	10.00	6.75	11.25	20.17	7.69	17.33	7.56
Nd						34.7	36.6	48.7	31.8	70.9	39.8	27.7	40.1	76.2	30.6	58.9	29.5
Sm						6.97	6.78	12.45	6.48	17.65	8.86	5.82	7.62	11.93	5.30	7.22	5.68
Eu						1.39	1.56	2.98	1.57	3.16	1.97	1.27	1.68	2.58	1.27	1.26	1.29
Gd						5.32	5.48	11.05	5.01	15.30	7.30	4.07	4.57	7.55	4.23	4.02	4.78
Tb						0.75	0.77	1.57	0.68	1.98	1.09	0.62	0.65	1.11	0.61	0.50	0.66
Dy						4.77	4.60	8.69	4.14	9.19	6.94	4.07	3.32	5.24	3.07	2.27	3.63
Ho						0.80	0.90	1.41	0.75	1.49	1.33	0.77	0.63	0.95	0.58	0.36	0.68
Er						1.99	2.33	3.40	2.17	3.35	3.41	2.30	1.72	2.43	1.55	1.02	1.75
Tm						0.28	0.32	0.45	0.30	0.34	0.53	0.33	0.23	0.37	0.24	0.16	0.26
Yb						1.61	2.16	2.44	1.99	1.54	3.24	1.87	1.45	2.27	1.52	1.05	1.49
Lu						0.23	0.30	0.32	0.26	0.17	0.42	0.27	0.21	0.33	0.22	0.18	0.22
Y						19.3	23.1	33.4	20.4	36.6	31.9	18.8	14.6	27.4	16.7	11.3	16.4
∑REE						196.8	208.6	193.6	156.3	266.5	208.0	143.7	231.5	423.1	158.3	352.1	146.3
Eu/Eu*^d						0.70	0.79	0.78	0.85	0.59	0.75	0.80	0.88	0.84	0.82	0.72	0.76
Ce/Ce*^d						0.94	1.05	1.00	0.96	0.98	0.95	1.05	0.96	1.08	0.98	0.98	0.89
(Ce/Yb)_N ^d						13.5	11.2	7.1	8.2	15.7	6.6	8.5	18.5	22.9	11.6	41.4	10.2

[1] *Corresponding author.

Brasil

Brasil

Age, composition, and source of the Macururé Mafic Suite, Southern Borborema Province, Brazil

Abstract