“…Titanite U–Pb dates have been interpreted to reflect a variety of processes, including neocrystallization and growth (Castelli & Rubatto, 2002; Cioffi et al, 2019; Corfu, 1996; Kohn & Corrie, 2011; Rapa et al, 2017; Scott & St‐Onge, 1995; Spencer et al, 2013; Stearns et al, 2015, 2016; Storey, Smith, & Jeffries, 2007; Verts et al, 1996; Walters & Kohn, 2017), fluid‐driven recrystallization or alteration (Cioffi et al, 2019; Corfu, 1996; Garber et al, 2017; Holder & Hacker, 2019; Marsh & Smye, 2017; Storey, Smith, & Jeffries, 2007), Pb volume diffusion and cooling (Cherniak, 1993; Kirkland et al, 2016; Mattinson, 1978; Mezger et al, 1991; Spear & Parish, 1996; Tucker et al, 1987), and deformation‐induced recrystallization (Bonamici et al, 2015; Gordon et al, 2021; Papapavlou et al, 2017, 2018; Spencer et al, 2013; Timms et al, 2020). Additionally, disequilibrium between titanite and zircon (or quartz) may result in overestimated Zr‐in‐titanite temperatures (Cruz‐Uribe et al, 2018; Cioffi et al, 2019; Johnson et al, 2020). Combined, these factors greatly complicate linking titanite textures, compositions, and U–Pb dates to metamorphic, metasomatic, and tectonic processes.…”