Chevkinite-Group Minerals from Granulite-Facies Metamorphic Rocks and Associated Pegmatites of East Antarctica and South India

Electron microprobe data are presented for chevkinite-group minerals from granulite-facies rocks and associated pegmatities of the Napier Complex and Mawson Station charnockite in East Antarctica and from the Eastern Ghats, South India. Their compositions conform to the general formula for this group, viz. A(4)BC(2)D(2)Si(4)O(22) where, in the analysed specimens A = (rare-earth elements (REE), Ca, Y, Th), B = Fe(2+) Mg, C = (Al, Mg, Ti, Fe(2+), Fe(3+), Zr) and D = Ti and plot within the perrierite field oftlic total Fe (as FeO) (wt.%) vs. CaO (wt.%) discriminator diagram of Macdonald and Belkin (2002). In contrast to most chevkinite-group minerals, the A site shows unusual enrichment in the MREE and HREE relative to the LREE and Ca. In one sample from the Napier Complex, Y is the dominant cation among the total REE + Y in the A site, the first reported case of Y-dominance in the chevkinite group. The minerals include the most Al-rich yet reported in the chevkinite group (<= 9.15 wt.% Al(2)O(3)), sufficient to fill the C site in two samples. Conversely, the amount of Ti in these samples does not fill the D site. and, thus, some of the Al could be making up the deficiency at D, a situation not previously reported in the chevkinite group. Fe abudances are low, requiring Mg to occupy up to 45% of the B site. The chevkinite-group minerals analysed originated from three distinct parageneses: (1) pegmatites containing hornblende and orthopyroxene or garnet; (2) orthopyroxene-bearing gneiss and granulite; (3) highly aluminous paragneisses in which the associated minerals are relatively magnesian or aluminous. Chevkinite-group minerals from the first two parageneses have relatively high FeO content and low MgO and Al(2)O(3) contents; their compositions plot in the field for mafic and intermediate igneous rocks. In contrast, chevkinite-group minerals from the third paragenesis are notably more aluminous and have greater Mg/Fe ratios.

Prismatine: Revalidation for Boron-Rich Compositions in the Kornerupine Group

Kornerupine and prismatine were introduced independently by Lorenzen in 1884 (but published in 1886 and 1893) and by Sauer in 1886, respectively. Ussing (1889) showed that the two minerals were sufficiently close crystallographically and chemically to be regarded as one species. However, recent analyses of boron using the ion microprobe and crystal structure refinement, indicate that the boron content of one tetrahedral site in kornerupine ranges from 0 to 1. Kornerupine and prismatine, from their respective type localities of Fiskenaesset, Greenland and Waldheim, Germany, are distinct minerals, members of an isomorphic series differing in boron content. For this reason, we re-introduce Sauer's name prismatine for kornerupines with B > 0.5 atoms per formula unit (p.f.u.) of 22(O,OH,F), and restrict the name kornerupine sensu stricto to kornerupines with B < 0.5 p.f.u. Kornerupine sensu lato is an appropriate group name for kornerupine of unknown boron content. Kornerupine sensu stricto and prismatine from the type localities differ also in Fe2+/Mg ratio, Si - (Mg + Fe2+ + Mn) content, Al content, F content, colour, density, cell parameters, and paragenesis. Both minerals formed under granulite-facies conditions with sapphirine and phlogopite, but kornerupine sensu stricto is associated with anorthite and homblende or gedrite, whereas prismatine is found with oligoclase (An9-13), sillimanite, garnet, and/or tourmaline. Occurrences at other localities suggest that increasing boron content extends the stability range of prismatine relative to that of kornerupine sensu stricto.