2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsg.2009.04.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of petrofabrics with composite magnetic fabrics of S–C mylonite in paramagnetic granite

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[Gleizes et al, 2001], [Gleizes et al, 2006] and [Ono et al, 2009]) show that there is a good correlation between magnetic lineation (K1) and foliation (plane normal to K3) and mineral lineation and foliation, respectively. Moreover, in these granites Km is proportional to the iron content of the iron-bearing silicates and thus it can be directly correlated to the modal content in biotite, amphibole and pyroxene.…”
Section: Petrostructural Microstructural and Kinematic Characteristimentioning
confidence: 92%
“…[Gleizes et al, 2001], [Gleizes et al, 2006] and [Ono et al, 2009]) show that there is a good correlation between magnetic lineation (K1) and foliation (plane normal to K3) and mineral lineation and foliation, respectively. Moreover, in these granites Km is proportional to the iron content of the iron-bearing silicates and thus it can be directly correlated to the modal content in biotite, amphibole and pyroxene.…”
Section: Petrostructural Microstructural and Kinematic Characteristimentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Parés and van der Pluijm (2002) carried out detailed magnetic analysis of mudstone, slates and schists and concluded that orientation of the magnetic lineation along the tectonic extension is dependent on the original AMS fabric, lithology and the intensity of deformation. As mentioned earlier, for granitic mylonites, the magnetic fabric may represent an intermediate fabric between the 'S' and 'C' fabric (Aranguren et al, 1996;Tomezzoli et al, 2003) or weakly mimic a fabric developed at later stages (Ono et al, 2010).…”
Section: Significance Of Composite Mesoscopic and Magnetic Fabricmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…However, for granitic gneisses that have undergone a considerable amount of post-emplacement solid state deformation, especially in the Himalaya, the magnetic fabric is difficult to interpret as it can be a combined effect of various deformation episodes (Jayangondaperumal et al, 2010;Tripathi et al, 2012). Past studies have shown that for granitic mylonites, the magnetic fabric may represent an intermediate fabric between the 'S' and 'C' fabric (Aranguren et al, 1996;Tomezzoli et al, 2003) or weakly mimic a fabric developed at later stages (Ono et al, 2010). These studies confirm that for granitic gneisses, the mesoscopic and magnetic foliation may not be concordant and magnetic fabric may result from superposed deformation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The quality of the obtained results is strongly dependent on the magnetic properties of materials, the type of fault rocks, and the number of samples used for determining the average magnetic foliation and lineation. In shear zones, the resultant maximum axis of the magnetic susceptibility ellipsoid is assumed to be parallel to the transport direction on C planes (see Parés and Van der Pluijm 2002), although case studies also indicate (1) intermediate orientations at the bisector between S and C planes (Aranguren et al 1996) and (2) opposite geometrical relationships, with k max perpendicular to the transport direction and, consequently, parallel to the intersection lineation between C and S planes (Oliva-Urcia et al 2009;Ono et al 2010). Because of these ambiguous relationships, it is extremely important to determine in each particular case the type of geometrical relationship between AMS and kinematic indicators both at the outcrop and microscopic scales (Debacker et al 2004(Debacker et al , 2010Haerinck et al 2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%