Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
Mineralogical Magazine Don't get GSW? Talk to your librarian.
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Mineralogical Magazine; December 2002; v. 66; no. 6; p. 815-832; DOI: 10.1180/0026461026660062
© 2002 Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland
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 ISI 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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Eales, H. V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

Caveats in defining the magmas parental to the mafic rocks of the Bushveld Complex, and the manner of their emplacement: review and commentary

H. V. Eales*

Department of Geology, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa

* E-mail: h.eales{at}ru.ac.za

The composition of magmas proposed as parental to the layered suite of the Bushveld Complex, and some models for the manner of their emplacement, are reviewed briefly. Included are some contributions published in South Africa, with which overseas readers might be less familiar. Emphasis is given to the broader features of the cumulates, and the contradictions raised by whole-rock compositional, Sr-isotopic, and trace-element data that cloud their correlation with proposed parental magmas. It is concluded that the Lower, Critical and Main Zones are the derivatives of only two primary magmatic lineages, while a third was added to residual liquids from which the layered rocks above the Pyroxenite Marker were formed. Excessive amounts of olivine and chromium in the cumulates of the Lower and Lower Critical Zones in the northern sector of the Western Limb can seemingly not be accounted for by the composition and volume of the putative magmas. This is attributed to (1) this sector being a proximal facies located close to the original feeder, and/or (2) crystal-charged magma batches, expelled from a lower magma chamber, being periodically injected into and dispersed within the liquids already in place in the Bushveld chamber. Thus, ongoing changes in the bulk composition of the liquids within the chamber would not be reflected in the rinds of earlier, chilled-facies rocks. The expulsion of significant volumes of liquid residua from the chamber during cumulate deposition is not ruled out.

KEYWORDS: magma, Bushveld Complex, South Africa, chromium, olivine




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
South African Journal of GeologyHome page
M. V. Merwe
The occurrence of the critical zone along the exposed southeastern sector of the eastern Bushveld Complex
South African Journal of Geology, December 1, 2007; 110(4): 617 - 630.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J PetrologyHome page
A. WILSON and G. CHUNNETT
Trace Element and Platinum Group Element Distributions and the Genesis of the Merensky Reef, Western Bushveld Complex, South Africa
J. Petrology, December 1, 2006; 47(12): 2369 - 2403.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland