Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
Economic Geology Signup for GSW Email News
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Economic Geology; September 2005; v. 100; no. 6; p. 1207-1227; DOI: 10.2113/100.6.1207
© 2005 Society of Economic Geologists
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Giroux, L. A.
Right arrow Articles by Benn, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

Emplacement of the Whistle Dike, the Whistle Embayment and Hosted Sulfides, Sudbury Impact Structure, Based on Anisotropies of Magnetic Susceptibility and Magnetic Remanence

Laura A. Giroux and Keith Benn{dagger}

Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Centre and Department of Earth Sciences, Magnetic Research Facility for Tectonic Studies, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada

{dagger} Corresponding author: e-mail, kbenn{at}uottawa.ca

The Sudbury impact structure is one of the few multi-ring meteorite impact structures recognized on Earth. The meteorite impact occurred ca. 1850 Ma, resulting in the production of impact melts derived from the crust, possibly with a mantle component. The impact melts formed the Sudbury Igneous Complex and also were emplaced as radial and concentric dikes within the target rocks. The Whistle dike, one of the radial "offset" dikes in the Sudbury impact structure, is connected to the Sudbury Igneous Complex by the Whistle embayment structure, which is composed of noritic cumulates. We present a study of the emplacement flow patterns in the Whistle dike and the embayment, using magnetic anisotropy methods to measure the petrofabrics that record emplacement.

Petrographic and scanning electron microscope observations, combined with thermal demagnetization measurements, and tests of the acquisition and demagnetization of anhysteretic magnetic remanence indicate that the primary sources of the magnetic signals in the sample suite are coarse-grained, soft coercivity magnetite and pyrrhotite that are interpreted to be primary igneous phases. Some samples also contain hard coercivity phases of possible metamorphic origin. The anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility (AMS), the anisotropy of an-hysteretic remanent magnetization (AARM) and the anisotropy of partial anhysteretic remanent magnetization (ApARM) were measured for the samples collected at 20 sites within the Whistle dike and the embayment structure, including an exposed chalcopyrite-rich massive sulfide body. The AMS method provided well-defined, interpretable fabrics for many of the sample sites. However, the AMS and AARM methods were unsuccessful in providing interpretable fabric measurements at some sample sites due to contributions from the hard coercivity ferromagnetic minerals. For those samples, the ApARM method was successful in isolating the sub-fabric defined by the primary magnetite ± pyrrhotite crystals.

The fabric maps are consistent with lateral (horizontal) injection of the Whistle offset dike and subsequent sinking of molten massive sulfides within the still ductile dike. Sinking of the massive sulfides is recorded by steeply plunging magnetic lineations. The magnetic fabrics in the cumulate norites of the embayment structure show that the norites were deposited in a dynamic environment that resulted in a well-oriented lineation, which may record flow of gravity or thermal currents, channelled along the embayment axis. In the embayment, the lineations plunge toward a massive sulfide body, suggesting the flow that led to the formation of the lineation may also have led to emplacement of the massive sulfide ore.

It is suggested that steeply plunging lineations elsewhere in the Whistle offset dike, and possibly in other Sudbury offset dikes, might indicate the trails of sunken massive sulfides in the subsurface. It is also suggested that magnetic fabrics might be useful to locate massive sulfide bodies hosted in embayment structures.







JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by Society of Economic Geologists