Geology topics

M.A. Nazarov

Publications and source records attributed to M.A. Nazarov.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2010

Lunar highland meteorite Dhofar 026 and Apollo sample 15418: Two strongly shocked, partially melted, granulitic breccias

Studies of lunar meteorite Dhofar 026, and comparison to Apollo sample 15418, indicate that Dhofar 026 is a strongly shocked granulitic breccia (or a fragmental breccia consisting almost entirely of granulitic breccia clasts) that experienced considerable post-shock heating, probably as a result of diffusion of heat into the rock from an external, hotter source. The shock converted plagioclase to maskelynite, indicating that the shock pressure was between 30 and 45 GPa. The post-shock heating raised the rock's temperature to about 1200 °C; as a result, the maskelynite devitrified, and extensive partial melting took place. The melting was concentrated in pyroxene-rich areas; all pyroxene melted. As the rock cooled, the partial melts crystallized with fine-grained, subophitic-poikilitic textures. Sample 15418 is a strongly shocked granulitic breccia that had a similar history, but evidence for this history is better preserved than in Dhofar 026. The fact that Dhofar 026 was previously interpreted as an impact melt breccia underscores the importance of detailed petrographic study in interpretation of lunar rocks that have complex textures. The name “impact melt” has, in past studies, been applied only to rocks in which the melt fraction formed by shock-induced total fusion. Recently, however, this name has also been applied to rocks containing melt formed by heating of the rocks by conductive heat transfer, assuming that impact is the ultimate source of the heat. We urge that the name “impact melt” be restricted to rocks in which the bulk of the melt formed by shock-induced fusion to avoid confusion engendered by applying the same name to rocks melted by different processes.

Meteoritics and Planetary Science↗

USGS2010

Comment on: “New” lunar meteorites: Impact melt and regolith breccias and large‐scale heterogeneities of the upper lunar crust, by P. H. Warren, F. Ulff‐Møller, and G. W. Kallemeyn

We described lunar meteorite Dhofar 026 (Cohen et al. 2004) and interpreted this rock as a strongly shocked granulitic breccia (or fragmental breccia consisting almost entirely of granulitic‐breccia clasts) that was partially melted by post‐shock heating. Warren et al. (2005) objected to many aspects of our interpretation: they were uncertain whether or not the bulk rock had been shocked; they disputed our identification of the precursor as granulitic breccia; and they suggested that mafic, igneous‐textured globules within the breccia, which we proposed were melted by post‐shock heating, are clasts with relict textures. The major evidence for shock of the bulk rock is the fact that the plagioclase in the lithologic domains that make up 80–90% of the rock is devitrified maskelynite. The major evidence for a granulitic‐breccia precursor is the texture of the olivine‐plagioclase domain that constitutes 40—45% of the rock; Warren et al. apparently overlooked or ignored this lithology. Textures of the mafic, igneous‐textured globules, and especially of the vesicles they contain, demonstrate that these bodies were melted and crystallized in situ. Warren et al. suggested that the rock might have originally been a regolith breccia, but the textural homogeneity of the rock and the absence of solar wind—derived noble gases preclude a regolith‐breccia precursor. Warren et al. classified the rock as an impact‐melt breccia, but they did not identify any fraction that was impact melt.

Meteoritics and Planetary Science↗