A high-precision 40Ar/39Ar age for the Nördlinger Ries impact crater, Germany, and implications for the accurate dating of terrestrial impact events

In situ U‐Pb measurements on zircons of the Ries impact crater are presented for three samples from the quarry at Polsingen. The U‐Pb data of most zircons plot along a discordia line, leading to an upper intercept of Carboniferous age (331 ± 32 Ma [2σ]). Four zircons define a concordia age of 313.2 ± 4.4 Ma (2σ). This age most probably represents the age of a granite from the basement target rocks. From granular textured zircon grains (including baddeleyite and anatase/Fe‐rich phases, first identified in the Ries crater), most probably recrystallized after impact (13 analyses, 4 grains), a concordia age of 14.89 ± 0.34 Ma (2σ) and an error weighted mean 206Pb*/238U age of Ma 14.63 ± 0.43 (2σ) is derived. Including the youngest concordant ages of five porous textured zircon grains (24 spot analyses), a concordia age of 14.75 ± 0.22 Ma (2σ) and a mean 206Pb*/238U age of 14.71 ± 0.26 Ma (2σ) can be calculated. These results are consistent with previously published 40Ar/39Ar ages of impact glasses and feldspar. Our results demonstrate that even for relatively young impact craters, reliable U‐Pb ages can be obtained using in situ zircon dating by SIMS. Frequently the texture of impact shocked zircon grains is explained by decomposition at high temperatures and recrystallization to a granular texture. This is most probably the case for the observed granular zircon grains having baddeleyite/anatase/Fe‐rich phases. We also observe non‐baddeleyite/anatase/Fe‐rich phase bearing zircons. For these domains, reset to crater age is more frequently for high U,Th contents. We tentatively explain the higher susceptibility to impact resetting of high U,Th domains by enhanced Pb loss and mobilization due to higher diffusivity within former metamict domains that were impact metamorphosed more easily into porous as well as granular textures during decomposition and recrystallization, possibly supported by Pb loss during postimpact cooling and/or hydrothermal activity.

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

U‐Pb dating of zircons from an impact melt of the Nördlinger Ries crater

Schwarz

Hanel

Trieloff

2020

“…In contrast, geochronological analyses of proximal and crater‐filling impactite samples may suffer from the effects of prolonged postimpact cooling and/or hydrothermal resetting/alteration, thus potentially yielding ages that are younger than the impact formation event (e.g., Schmieder et al. ; Kenny et al. ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

(U‐Th)/He zircon dating of Chesapeake Bay distal impact ejecta from ODP site 1073

Biren

Wartho

Soest

et al. 2019

Single crystal (U‐Th)/He dating has been undertaken on 21 detrital zircon grains extracted from a core sample from Ocean Drilling Project (ODP) site 1073, which is located ~390 km northeast of the center of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure. Optical and electron imaging in combination with energy dispersive X‐ray microanalysis (EDS) of zircon grains from this late Eocene sediment shows clear evidence of shock metamorphism in some zircon grains, which suggests that these shocked zircon crystals are distal ejecta from the formation of the ~40 km diameter Chesapeake Bay impact structure. (U‐Th/He) dates for zircon crystals from this sediment range from 33.49 ± 0.94 to 305.1 ± 8.6 Ma (2σ), implying crystal‐to‐crystal variability in the degree of impact‐related resetting of (U‐Th)/He systematics and a range of different possible sources. The two youngest zircon grains yield an inverse‐variance weighted mean (U‐Th)/He age of 33.99 ± 0.71 Ma (2σ uncertainties n = 2; mean square weighted deviation = 2.6; probability [P] = 11%), which is interpreted to be the (U‐Th)/He age of formation of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure. This age is in agreement with K/Ar, 40Ar/39Ar, and fission track dates for tektites from the North American strewn field, which have been interpreted as associated with the Chesapeake Bay impact event.

“…(b) Microbial trace fossils in 14.8 million‐year‐old impact glass from the Ries Impact Structure, Germany (Schmieder et al. ; Sapers et al. )…”

Section: Objective 1: Interpret the Primary Geologic Processes And Himentioning

confidence: 99%

The potential science and engineering value of samples delivered to Earth by Mars sample return

Beaty¹,

Grady²,

McSween³

et al. 2019

Executive Summary Return of samples from the surface of Mars has been a goal of the international Mars science community for many years. Affirmation by NASA and ESA of the importance of Mars exploration led the agencies to establish the international MSR Objectives and Samples Team (iMOST). The purpose of the team is to re‐evaluate and update the sample‐related science and engineering objectives of a Mars Sample Return (MSR) campaign. The iMOST team has also undertaken to define the measurements and the types of samples that can best address the objectives. Seven objectives have been defined for MSR, traceable through two decades of previously published international priorities. The first two objectives are further divided into sub‐objectives. Within the main part of the report, the importance to science and/or engineering of each objective is described, critical measurements that would address the objectives are specified, and the kinds of samples that would be most likely to carry key information are identified. These seven objectives provide a framework for demonstrating how the first set of returned Martian samples would impact future Martian science and exploration. They also have implications for how analogous investigations might be conducted for samples returned by future missions from other solar system bodies, especially those that may harbor biologically relevant or sensitive material, such as Ocean Worlds (Europa, Enceladus, Titan) and others. Summary of Objectives and Sub‐Objectives for MSR Identified by iMOST This objective is divided into five sub‐objectives that would apply at different landing sites. 1.1 Characterize the essential stratigraphic, sedimentologic, and facies variations of a sequence of Martian sedimentary rocks. 1.2 Understand an ancient Martian hydrothermal system through study of its mineralization products and morphological expression. 1.3 Understand the rocks and minerals representative of a deep subsurface groundwater environment. 1.4 Understand water/rock/atmosphere interactions at the Martian surface and how they have changed with time. 1.5 Determine the petrogenesis of Martian igneous rocks in time and space. This objective has three sub‐objectives: 2.1 Assess and characterize carbon, including possible organic and pre‐biotic chemistry. 2.2 Assay for the presence of biosignatures of past life at sites that hosted habitable environments and could have preserved any biosignatures. 2.3 Assess the possibility that any life forms detected are alive, or were recently alive. Summary of iMOST Findings Several specific findings were identified during the iMOST study. While they are not explicit recommendations, we suggest that they should serve as guidelines for future decision making regarding planning of potential future MSR missions. The samples to be collected by the Mars 2020 (M‐2020) rover will be of sufficient size and quality to address and solve a wide variety of scientific questions. Samples, by definition, are a statistical representation of a larger entity...