Mafic and felsic plutonism in the Elvas region (SW Iberia, Portugal): two distinct Nd isotope sources and geodynamics

The occurrence of mafic (mainly gabbros and diorites) and felsic (syenites and granites) rocks, in close spatial association, in the Elvas region, at the northern part of the Ossa-Morena Zone, could be interpreted as a single bimodal (alkaline) plutonic complex. However, in spite of scarce isotopic (Sm-Nd) data, the co-magmatic origin of both rock groups (mafic and felsic) has already been questioned [1]. Based on the mineral chemistry of primary clinopyroxenes (Di–Hd, %En: 45.5 – 27.2) and representative whole-rock analyses, gabbros and diorites of the Elvas massif show a transitional character between alkaline and non-alkaline fields and wide compositions: SiO2 (42.47 – 58.00 wt%); TiO2 (0.24 – 1.68 wt%); Y/Nb (4.0 – 10.7); Th (0.1 – 6.8 ppm); Zr (18.6 – 576.9 ppm). The felsic group is composed by highly differentiated rocks which correspond to distinct levels of silica saturation and alkalinity. Peralkaline syenites usually present sodic (riebeckite) and sodic-calcic (aegirine-augite, ferrowinchite) inosilicates and reveal quite variable compositions: SiO2 (57.50 – 72.07 wt%); TiO2 (0.10 – 1.45 wt%); Th (1.7 – 67.0 ppm); Zr (133.0 – 4800.0 ppm). The alkaline granites show hedenbergite as the characteristic inosilicate, presenting relatively common compositions: SiO2 (61.85 – 78.06 wt%); TiO2 (0.21 – 0.58 wt%); Th (11.8 – 38.4 ppm); Zr (317.3 – 1234.6 ppm) [2]. Recent Sm-Nd isotopic results, on a total of 18 whole-rock samples (6 mafites and 12 felsites), allow new and more consistent interpretation concerning the petrogenesis of these plutonic rocks. Assuming an age of 490 Ma [3], the felsic rocks provide (0.6 < Nd490 < 4.3), similar to other contemporary (per)alkaline rocks of this region [4], reflecting magmatic extractions from time-integrated depleted mantle sources followed by variable and incomplete mixing (and/or AFC-type) processes with enriched, probably crustal sources. This alkaline/peralkaline magmatism is thought to represent the main regional record of the rifting event which presumably led to the opening of the Rheic Ocean. On the other hand, the mafic plutonic rocks of the Elvas massif cannot represent the magmatic precursors of these syenites and granites as they show completely distinct Nd isotopic ratios (3.7 < Nd490 < 1.2) indicating important contribution of long-term enriched (crustal) sources. Instead, considering the age and the Nd isotopic signature of other mafic plutonic unit emplaced nearby (the Campo Maior massif: ca. 370 Ma; 6.0 < Nd370 < 5.2) [5], and recalculating the isotopic ratios of the Elvas massif for the same age (4.3 < Nd370 < 1.6), it is plausible to consider that these plutons (Campo Maior and Elvas) can be coeval and representative of the Variscan magmatism in this region. In such hypothesis, the differences between these isotopic values could be explained, on a time-integrated basis, either by magmatic sources for the Elvas massif less enriched in LREE than the sources involved in the Campo Maior massif, or, if both plutonites share similar depleted mantle sources, by magmatic differentiation paths considerably affected by crustal contamination processes, which reached higher degrees in the Campo Maior massif.

U-Pb geochronology and Nd isotope contributions to the interpretation of a peculiar ring massif: the Santa Eulália plutonic complex (SW Iberia, Portugal)

The Santa Eulalia plutonic complex (SEPC) is a late-Variscan granitic body placed in the Ossa-Morena Zone. The host rocks of the complex belong to metamorphic formations from Proterozoic to Lower Paleozoic. The SEPC is a ring massif (ca. 400 km2 area) composed by two main granitic facies with different colours and textures. From the rim to the core, there is (i) a peripheral pink medium- to coarse-grained granite (G0 group) involving large elongated masses of mafic and intermediate rocks, from gabbros to granodiorites (M group), and (ii) a central gray medium-grained granite (G1 group). The mafic to intermediate rocks (M group) are metaluminous and show wide compositions: 3.34–13.51 wt% MgO; 0.70–7.20 ppm Th; 0.84–1.06 (Eu/Eu*)N (Eu* calculated between Sm and Tb); 0.23–0.97 (Nb/Nb*)N (Nb* calculated between Th and La). Although involving the M-type bodies and forming the outer ring, the G0 granites are the most differentiated magmatic rocks of the SEPC, with a transitional character between metaluminous and peraluminous: 0.00–0.62 wt% MgO; 15.00–56.00 ppm Th; and 0.19–0.42 (Eu/Eu*)N ; 0.08–0.19 (Nb/Nb*)N [1][2]. The G1 group is composed by monzonitic granites with a dominant peraluminous character and represents the most homogeneous compositional group of the SEPC: 0.65–1.02 wt% MgO; 13.00–16.95 ppm Th; 0.57–0.70 (Eu/Eu*)N ; 0.14–0.16 (Nb/Nb*)N . According to the SiO2 vs. (Na2O+K2O–CaO) relationships, the M and G1 groups predominantly fall in the calc-alkaline field, while the G0 group is essencially alkali-calcic; on the basis of the SiO2 vs. FeOt/(FeOt+MgO) correlation, SEPC should be considered as a magnesian plutonic association [3]. New geochronological data (U-Pb on zircons) slightly correct the age of the SEPC, previously obtained by other methods (290 Ma, [4]). They provide ages of 306  2 Ma for the M group, 305  6 Ma for the G1 group, and 301  4 Ma for the G0 group, which confirm the late-Variscan character of the SEPC, indicating however a faintly older emplacement, during the Upper Carboniferous. Recent whole-rock isotopic data show that the Rb-Sr system suffered significant post-magmatic disturbance, but reveal a consistent set of Sm-Nd results valuable in the approach to the magmatic sources of this massif: M group (2.9 < Ndi < +1.8); G1 group (5.8 < Ndi < 4.6); G0 group (2.2 < Ndi < 0.8). These geochemical data suggest a petrogenetic model for the SEPC explained by a magmatic event developed in two stages. Initially, magmas derived from long-term depleted mantle sources (Ndi < +1.8 in M group) were extracted to the crust promoting its partial melting and extensive mixing and/or AFC magmatic evolution, thereby generating the G1 granites (Ndi < 4.6). Subsequently, a later extraction of similar primary magmas in the same place or nearby, could have caused partial melting of some intermediate facies (e.g. diorites) of the M group, followed by magmatic differentiation processes, mainly fractional crystallization, able to produce residual liquids compositionally close to the G0 granites (Ndi < 0.8). The kinetic energy associated with the structurally controlled (cauldron subsidence type?) motion of the G0 liquids to the periphery, would have been strong enough to drag up M group blocks as those occurring inside the G0 granitic ring.