Impact melt- and projectile-bearing ejecta at Barringer Crater, Arizona

Metzler

2017

319

359

Abstract-We reevaluate the systematics and geologic setting of terrestrial, lunar, Martian, and asteroidal "impactites" resulting from single or multiple impacts. For impactites derived from silicate rocks and sediments, we propose a unified and updated system of progressive shock metamorphism. "Shock-metamorphosed rocks" occur as lithic clasts or melt particles in proximal impactites at impact craters, and rarely in distal impactites. They represent a wide range of metamorphism, typically ranging from unshocked to shock melted. As the degree of shock metamorphism, at a given shock pressure, depends primarily on the mineralogical composition and the porosity of a rock or sediment sample, different shock classification systems are required for different types of planetary rocks and sediments. We define shock classification systems for eight rock and sediment classes which are assigned to three major groups of rocks and sediments (1) crystalline rocks with classes F, M, A, and U; (2) chondritic rocks (class C); and (3) sedimentary rocks and sediments with classes SR, SE, and RE. The abbreviations stand for felsic (F), mafic (M), anorthositic (A), ultramafic (U), sedimentary rocks (SR), unconsolidated sediments (SE), and regoliths (RE). In each class, the progressive stages of shock metamorphism are denominated S1 to Sx. These progressive shock stages are introduced as: S1-S7 for F, S1-S7 for M, S1-S6 for A, S1-S7 for U, S1-S7 for C, S1-S7 for SR, S1-S5 for SE, and S1-S6 for RE. S1 stands for "unshocked" and Sx (variable between S5 and S7) stands for "whole rock melting." We propose a sequence of symbols characterizing the degree of shock metamorphism of a sample, i.e

Section: Open Issuesmentioning

confidence: 97%

Shock metamorphism of planetary silicate rocks and sediments: Proposal for an updated classification system

Stöffler

Metzler

2017

319

359

“…(), and Osinski et al. (). For this study, two doubly polished thin sections (MC_1 and MC_2) and a polished thick section (MC_3) were prepared from three small, irregularly shaped specimens of impact melt rock (Fig.…”

Section: Geological Background Related To the Natural Samples And Expmentioning

confidence: 98%

Silicate liquid immiscibility in impact melts

Fazio

Ebert

et al. 2017

We have investigated silicate emulsions in impact glasses and impact melt rocks from the Wabar (Saudi Arabia), Kamil (Egypt), Barringer (USA), and Tenoumer (Mauritania) impact structures, and in experimentally generated impact glasses and laser‐generated glasses (MEMIN research unit) by scanning electron microscopy, electron microprobe analysis, and transmission electron microscopy. Textural evidence of silicate liquid immiscibility includes droplets of one glass disseminated in a chemically distinct glassy matrix; sharp phase boundaries (menisci) between the two glasses; deformation and coalescence of droplets; and occurrence of secondary, nanometer‐sized quench droplets in Si‐rich glasses. The compositions of the conjugate immiscible liquids (Si‐rich and Fe‐rich) are consistent with phase separation in two‐liquid fields in the general system Fe2SiO4–KAlSi3O8–SiO2–CaO–MgO–TiO2–P2O5. Major‐element partition coefficients are well correlated with the degree of polymerization (NBO/T) of the Si‐rich melt: Fe, Ca, Mg, and Ti are concentrated in the poorly polymerized, Fe‐rich melt, whereas K, Na, and Si prefer the highly polymerized, Si‐rich melt. Partitioning of Al is less pronounced and depends on bulk melt composition. Thus, major element partitioning between the conjugate liquids closely follows trends known from tholeiitic basalts, lunar basalts, and experimental analogs. The characteristics of impact melt inhomogeneity produced by melt unmixing in a miscibility gap are then compared to impact melt inhomogeneity caused by incomplete homogenization of different (miscible or immiscible) impact melts that result from shock melting of different target lithologies from the crater's melt zone, which do not fully homogenize and equilibrate due to rapid quenching. By taking previous reports on silicate emulsions in impact glasses into account, it follows that silicate impact melts of variable composition, cooling rate, and crystallization history might readily unmix during cooling, thereby rendering silicate liquid immiscibility a much more common process in the evolution of impact melts than previously recognized.

“…; Osinski and Spray ; Osinski et al. , , ; and references therein). Answering this question is of general interest to the planetary sciences because impact‐induced release of CO 2 from carbonates into planetary atmospheres can affect atmosphere composition, climate stability, and even the evolution of life (Alvarez et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…; Graup ; Osinski and Spray ; Osinski et al. , ; Hörz et al. ), and (3) numerical modeling (Pierazzo et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The reaction of carbonates in contact with laser‐generated, superheated silicate melts: Constraining impact metamorphism of carbonate‐bearing target rocks

Bläsing

Hecht

et al. 2018

We simulated entrainment of carbonates (calcite, dolomite) in silicate impact melts by 1‐bar laser melting of silicate–carbonate composite targets, using sandstone, basalt, calcite marble, limestone, dolomite marble, and iron meteorite as starting materials. We demonstrate that carbonate assimilation by silicate melts of variable composition is extremely fast (seconds to minutes), resulting in contamination of silicate melts with carbonate‐derived CaO and MgO and release of CO2 at the silicate melt–carbonate interface. We identify several processes, i.e., (1) decomposition of carbonates releases CO2 and produces residual oxides (CaO, MgO); (2) incorporation of residual oxides from proximally dissociating carbonates into silicate melts; (3) rapid back‐reactions between residual CaO and CO2 produce idiomorphic calcite crystallites and porous carbonate quench products; (4) high‐temperature reactions between Ca‐contaminated silicate melts and carbonates yield typical skarn minerals and residual oxide melts; (5) mixing and mingling between Ca‐ or Ca,Mg‐contaminated and Ca‐ or Ca,Mg‐normal silicate melts; (6) precipitation of Ca‐ or Ca,Mg‐rich silicates from contaminated silicate melts upon quenching. Our experiments reproduce many textural and compositional features of typical impact melts originating from silicate–carbonate targets. They reinforce hypotheses that thermal decomposition of carbonates, rapid back‐reactions between decomposition products, and incorporation of residual oxides into silicate impact melts are prevailing processes during impact melting of mixed silicate–carbonate targets. However, by comparing our results with previous studies and thermodynamic considerations on the phase diagrams of calcite and quartz, we envisage that carbonate impact melts are readily produced during adiabatic decompression from high shock pressure, but subsequently decompose due to heat influx from coexisting silicate impact melts or hot breccia components. Under certain circumstances, postshock conditions may favor production and conservation of carbonate impact melts. We conclude that the response of mixed carbonate–silicate targets to impact might involve melting and decomposition of carbonates, the dominant response being governed by a complex variety of factors.