Experimental Investigation of Eclogite Rheology and Its Fabrics at High Temperature and Pressure

Eclogite plays an important role in mantle convection and geodynamics in subduction zones. An improved understanding of processes in the deeper levels of subduction zones and collision belts requires information on eclogite rheology. However, the deformation processes and associated fabrics in eclogite are not well understood. Incompatible views of deformation mechanism have been proposed for both garnet and omphacite. We present here deformation behaviour of eclogite at temperatures of 1027–1427 °C, confining pressures of 2.5–3.5 GPa, and strain rates of 1 × 10^?5 s^?1 to 5 × 10^?4 s^?1. We obtained a power‐law creep for the high temperature and pressure deformation of a ‘dry’ eclogite (50 vol.% garnet, 40% omphacite and 10% quartz) with A = 10^{3.3 ± 1.0}, n = 3.5 ± 0.4, ΔE =403 ± 30 KJ mol^?1 and ΔV = 27.2 cm³ mol^?1. The two principal minerals of eclogite have greatly different strengths. Progressive increase of garnet results in a smooth increase in strength. Analysis by electron back‐scattered diffraction shows that: (1) garnet displays pole figures with near random distributions of misorientation angle under both dry and wet conditions; (2) omphacite shows pronounced lattice preferred orientations (LPOs), suggesting a dominant dislocation creep mechanism. Further investigation into the water effects on eclogite show: (3) water content does not influence the style of omphacite fabric but increases slightly the fabric strength; (4) grain boundary processes dominate the deformation of garnet under high water fugacity or high shear‐strain conditions, yielding a random LPO similar to that of non‐deforming garnet, despite the strong shape preferred orientation (SPO) observed. {110} [001] slip may dominate the deformation of rutile. Quartz displays complicated and inconsistent LPOs in eclogite. These results are remarkably similar to observations from deformed eclogites in nature.     

关于秦岭造山带

纪念老一代地球科学家李四光先生,思考地球科学与大地构造学的创新发展。文章以秦岭造山带为例思考大陆复合造山及其动力学,认知概括秦岭造山带基本属性与特质,探索认识中小多板块多期洋陆俯冲造山-陆-陆板块俯冲碰撞造山的板块复合造山,并又强烈叠加复合陆内造山,造成复杂组成与结构,形成立交桥式四维流变学分层的多层非耦合动态演化的大陆复合造山带模型,及其新的演化趋势动态和构成国家人类需求的成矿成藏物质财富与宜居的地表系统环境等,期望前瞻探索认知地球发展的未来。文章还就秦岭造山带几个有争议的问题,进行简要讨论,共求新的探索研究发展。期盼学习李四光先生学术理论精华,尤其在深化发展板块构造,探索认知大陆构造与动力学方面,创新发展地质力学,以宇宙太阳系视野探索地球动力学,推动大地构造新发展。      

石香肠构造研究综述

石香肠构造是一种传统的线状构造,由于其在区域构造应力场方面的研究意义及其所包含的流变学信息和控矿意义等一直吸引着研究者的关注.简述了近几十年来石香肠构造在形态学研究上的进展,分析了其在理论研究上的成果,概括了其在应用研究方面的现状,并对当前及今后石香肠构造的研究方向提出了建议.     

基于深反射地震剖面的沂沭断裂带岩石圈精细结构

为揭示沂沭断裂带深部结构及发生—发展过程,查清断裂切割深度及对岩石圈地幔的破坏,探讨沂沭断裂带的构造组合样式、运动方式、地壳稳定性及其对资源环境的约束作用,研究团队于2019年在沂沭断裂带南段沂南—莒县附近布设了一条长约60 km的深反射地震剖面,系统采集了沂沭断裂带和两侧地块的地震数据,对沂沭断裂带深部岩石圈精细结构进行了解剖.结果显示,该区岩石圈结构在横向上表现为以沂沭断裂带为界的块状结构特征,地壳厚度约30.8～39.5 km;莫霍面总体呈西浅东深态势,并被西倾的沂水—汤头断裂(F2)和昌邑—大店断裂(F4)错断,垂直落差达10.5 km.与浅部"两堑夹一垒"的构造组合样式不同的是,沂沭断裂带在深部剖面上表现为由沂水—汤头断裂(F2)和昌邑—大店断裂(F4)向上延伸与分叉散开的多条断裂组成"双枝状"构造组合样式.断裂带内被断层切割的界面反射波多呈向上的拱弧形,其构造形迹具有伸展、挤压和走滑并存的特征,推断这些界面为层间滑脱构造,它们指示了沂沭断裂带"多层滑移"构造运动方式.该断裂带不仅切穿了近地表、壳内地质界面,F2、F4断裂还向下切割莫霍面,深入岩石圈地幔,是深达地幔的深大断裂构造带,为地幔热物质的上涌提供了通道,对中生代的岩浆活动和内生成矿具有控制作用.地震剖面西端的铜井金矿成矿与沿F2断裂上侵的铜井杂岩体关系密切;剖面东端的火山机构保存完整,没有明显构造破坏痕迹,据此认为沂沭断裂带左行走滑主要发生在早白垩世青山期以前,其后水平滑移量应不大.从区域地质分布及地震反演结果看,昌邑—大店断裂(F4)明显将山东省分割为鲁西和鲁东两个地质构造单元,因此将其作为区域地质构造分界线是合理的.本项研究结果进一步加深了沂沭断裂带深、浅部结构的认识,为分析研究沂沭断裂带的深部过程和浅部构造响应及对资源环境的影响提供了资料约束.     

南海岩石圈结构与油气资源分布

南海是中国唯一发育有洋壳的边缘海,是世界四大海洋油气聚集中心之一。油气勘探表明,南海的油气田分布在北部、西部和南部陆缘沉积盆地内,而大中型油气田集中分布在西部海域盆地中,自北而南有莺歌海—琼东南盆地、万安盆地、湄公盆地、曾母盆地和文莱—沙巴盆地,且以含气为主,含油次之。此外,这一区域深水区还存在多个潜在的大型含油气盆地。研究发现,南海的油气分布与深部岩石圈结构有密切关系。在构造上,南海的含油气盆地位于岩石圈块体边缘或之上,受控于大型岩石圈断裂的发育与演化。在油气富集的盆地中,莫霍面显著凸起,与盆地基底形成镜像,地壳厚度最薄处仅数千米厚,热流值明显较周围地区高,热岩石圈厚度大大减薄。地震层析成像结果反映,这些盆地深部发育一条规模宏大的北西向上地幔隆起带,自红河口向东南穿越南海西部海盆,一直延伸到婆罗州东北部地区,在宏观上控制了南海的油气分布与富集。     

大陆岩石圈流变学研究

简单介绍了流变学的概念和两种基本研究方法,基于大陆岩石圈较大洋岩石圈有更为复杂的流变特征客观事实,指出研究大陆岩石圈流变学的重要性,并提出几个主要的研究方向和领域。     

Abraham Gottlob Werner: History and folk‐history

The Neptunist‐Vulcanist controversy has distorted the reputations of both James Hutton and Abraham Gottlob Werner. Among English‐speaking geologists, Hutton is often presented as the Father of Modern Geology, whereas Werner's views are seen as ‘palpably absurd’. Both men made major contributions to geology, but they were men of their age, the second half of the eighteenth century, and remote in their general ideas from those current since Lyell's day in the mid‐nineteenth. Werner was greatly admired by some of his ablest contemporaries, and their admiration becomes inexplicable if we regard his views as ‘palpably absurd’. Historical research in the last few years, reviewed here, is able to show how Werner's views arose and why they seemed persuasive at the time. Some examples of Neptunist observations in Australia in the 1820's are given to show the application and later modification of the theory.