Back to article

Figures and tables

Accessory mineral constraints on crustal evolution: elemental fingerprints for magma discrimination

E. Bruand1,

1Laboratoire Magmas et Volcans, Campus Universitaire des Cezeaux, 6 avenue Blaise Pascal, 63718 Aubiere, France

M. Fowler2,

2School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Portsmouth, PO1 3QL, United Kingdom

C. Storey2,

2School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Portsmouth, PO1 3QL, United Kingdom

O. Laurent3,

3Geosciences Environnement Toulouse, Université de Toulouse, 31400 Toulouse, France

C. Antoine1,

1Laboratoire Magmas et Volcans, Campus Universitaire des Cezeaux, 6 avenue Blaise Pascal, 63718 Aubiere, France

M. Guitreau1,

1Laboratoire Magmas et Volcans, Campus Universitaire des Cezeaux, 6 avenue Blaise Pascal, 63718 Aubiere, France

E. Heilimo4,

4Geotalo, Akatemiankatu 1, University of Turku, Finlandbr

O. Nebel5

5School of Earth, Atmosphere and Environment, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

Affiliations  |  Corresponding Author  |  Cite as  |  Funding information

Bruand, E., Fowler, M., Storey, C., Laurent, O., Antoine, C., Guitreau, M., Heilimo, E., Nebel, O. (2020) Accessory mineral constraints on crustal evolution: elemental fingerprints for magma discrimination. Geochem. Persp. Let. 13, 7–12 .

This work was supported by the Natural Environment Research Council (grant NE/I025573/1) and by the French Government Laboratory of Excellence initiative n° ANR-10-LABX-0006, the Region Auvergne and the European Regional Development Fund.

Geochemical Perspectives Letters v13  |  doi: 10.7185/geochemlet.2006
Received 27 August 2019  |  Accepted 18 January 2020  |  Published 26 February 2020
Copyright © The Authors

Published by the European Association of Geochemistry
under Creative Commons License CC BY-NC-ND 4.0




Figure 1 Cartoon of continental crust evolution, from TTG (blue) and sanukitoid (pink) in the Archean towards typical arc magma (green) in Proterozoic and Phanerozoic, plus samples studied in this contribution.
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint


Figure 2 Chondrite normalised REE patterns for apatite (a-e) and titanite (f-i). Diagram j represents La/Yb vs. Yb values normalised to chondrite for whole rock data, modified after Moyen and Martin (2012)

Moyen, J., Martin, H. (2012) Forty years of TTG research. Lithos 148, 312-336.

. Green and blue fields correspond to post 2.5 Ga granitoids and TTG, respectively.
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint


Figure 3 Ternary discrimination diagrams; 10*Sr-LREE-10*Y for apatite and 100*Sr-LREE-10*Y for titanite.
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint


Figure 4 Apatite compositions: (a) La vs. Y diagram discriminating 2 groups of apatite, (b) LaN/SmN vs. ASI (nAl/((nCa-3.33*nP) + nNa + nK)), discriminating peraluminous from metaluminous compositions and (c) Sr vs. Y, discriminating apatite from HP- and LP-TTG magmas.
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint