Contrasting stratified plutons exposed in tilt blocks, Eldorado Mountains, Colorado River Rift, NV, USA

Roof-to-floor exposures of mid-Miocene plutons in tilt blocks south of Las Vegas, NV, reveal distinct but strongly contrasting magma chamber statigraphy. The Searchlight and Aztec Wash plutons are well-exposed, stratified intrusions that show a similar broad range in composition from 45–75 wt.% SiO₂. Homogeneous granites that comprise about one-third of each intrusion are virtually identical in texture and elemental and isotopic chemistry. Mafic rocks that are present in both plutons document basaltic input into felsic magma chambers. Isotopic compositions suggest that mafic magmas were derived from enriched lithospheric mantle with minor crustal contamination, whereas more felsic rocks are hybrids that are either juvenile basaltic magma+crustal melt mixtures or products of anatexis of ancient crust+young (Mesozoic or Miocene?) mafic intraplate.

Despite general similarities, the two plutons differ markedly in dimensions and lithologic stratigraphy. The Searchlight pluton is much thicker (10 vs. 3 km) and has thick quartz monzonite zones at its roof and floor that are absent in the Aztec Wash pluton. Isotopic and elemental data from Searchlight pluton suggest that the upper and lower zones are cogenetic with the granite; we interpret the finer grained, slightly more felsic upper zone to represent a downward migrating solidification front and the lower zone to be cumulate. In contrast, the upper part of the Aztec Wash pluton is granite, and a heterogeneous, mafic-rich injection zone with distinct isotopic chemistry forms the lower two-thirds of the intrusion. Similar mafic rocks are relatively sparse in Searchlight pluton and do not appear to have played a central role in construction of the pluton. Large felsic and composite dikes that attest to repeated recharging and intrachamber magma transfer are common in the Aztec Wash pluton but absent in the Searchlight pluton. Thus, although both intrusions were filled by similar magmas and both developed internal stratification, the two intrusions evolved very differently. The distinctions may be attributable to scale and resulting longevity and/or to subtle differences in tectonic setting.