MafiCH: a general model for H2O–CO2 solubility in mafic magmas

Allison, C. M.; Roggensack, K.; Clarke, A. B.

doi:10.1007/s00410-022-01903-y

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These observations raise doubts about the preservation potential of vapor bubbles within intrusive complexes. This is especially relevant at deeper levels in the crust due to the increasing solubility of CO 2 , H 2 O, and other volatiles with pressure (41)(42)(43)(44). It was suggested that sulfide globules could be transported from metasomatized mantle domains by supercritical CO 2 fluids (10).…”

Section: Carbonate Coats Rather Than Silicate Capsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Carbonated magmatic sulfide systems: Still or sparkling?

Cherdantseva,

Anenburg,

Fiorentini

et al. 2024

Sci. Adv.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For decades, there has been debate surrounding the transport of dense metal-rich sulfide liquid in mafic magmas. This topic is crucial to understanding the genesis of valuable resources of nickel, copper, and platinum-group elements, which are essential for a sustainable, emission-free energy future. Recent studies of mineralized mafic magmas suggested that gas bubbles adhere to sulfide globules, reducing their density and favoring upward transport. While this hypothesis may explain sulfide mobility in near-surface magmatic environments, it is at odds with key mineralogic and textural observations and does not explain how long-distance sulfide transport operates. Here, we suggest an alternative hypothesis that builds on previous observations, focusing on the interaction between carbonate melt and sulfide liquid. We demonstrate experimentally that carbonate melt wraps sulfide globules forming a relatively mobile pair that may mediate metal-rich sulfide transport from mantle to crust.

show abstract

Section: Carbonate Coats Rather Than Silicate Capsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Carbonated magmatic sulfide systems: Still or sparkling?

Cherdantseva,

Anenburg,

Fiorentini

et al. 2024

Sci. Adv.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The solubilities of both H 2 O and CO 2 are controlled by vapor pressure (e.g., Fogel & Rutherford 1990, Blank et al 1993, Tamic et al 2001, Newman & Lowenstern 2002, Papale et al 2006, Ghiorso & Gualda 2015, melt composition (e.g., Moore et al 1998, Dixon 1997, Di Matteo et al 2004, Lesne et al 2011, Romano et al 2021, and temperature (e.g., Holtz et al 1995). Extensive experimental work has led to well-calibrated models that predict the solubilities of H 2 O and CO 2 as functions of melt and fluid compositions, pressure, and temperature, for either specific melt compositions (e.g., Dixon et al 1995, Newman & Lowenstern 2002, Di Matteo et al 2004, Liu et al 2005, Ryan et al 2015, Schanofski et al 2019 or more generalized magmatic systems (e.g., Papale et al 2006, Iacono-Marziano et al 2012, Ghiorso & Gualda 2015, Allison et al 2022.…”

Section: The Driving Mechanism For Gas Exsolution From Magmasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bubble Formation in Magma

Gardner

Wadsworth

Carley

et al. 2023

Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Volcanic eruptions are driven by bubbles that form when volatile species exsolve from magma. The conditions under which bubbles form depend mainly on magma composition, volatile concentration, presence of crystals, and magma decompression rate. These are all predicated on the mechanism by which volatiles exsolve from the melt to form bubbles. We critically review the known or inferred mechanisms of bubble formation in magmas: homogeneous nucleation, heterogeneous nucleation on crystal surfaces, and spontaneous phase separation (spinodal decomposition). We propose a general approach for calculating bubble nucleation rates as the sum of the contributions from homogeneous and heterogeneous nucleation, suggesting that nucleation may not be limited to a single mechanism prior to eruption. We identify three major challenges in which further experimental, analytical, and theoretical work is required to permit the development of a general model for bubble formation under natural eruption conditions. ▪ We review the mechanisms of bubble formation in magma and summarize the conditions under which the various mechanisms are understood to operate. ▪ Bubble formation mechanisms may evolve throughout magma ascent as conditions change such that bubbles may form simultaneously and sequentially via more than one mechanism. ▪ Contributions from both homogeneous nucleation and heterogeneous nucleation on multiphase crystal phases can be captured via a single equation. ▪ Future work should focus on constraining macroscopic surface tension, characterizing the microphysics, and developing a general framework for modeling bubble formation, via all mechanisms, over natural magma ascent pathways. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Volume 51 is May 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

show abstract

“…Respondents could select as many as they wanted and include models not listed in the survey. CHOSETTO (Moretti et al, 2003;Moretti & Papale, 2004), D-Compress (Burgisser et al, 2015), D&Z06 (Duan & Zhang, 2006), EVo (Liggins et al, 2020;, I-M+12 (Iacono-Marziano et al, 2012), MafiCH (Allison et al, 2022), MAGEC (Sun & Lee, 2022), MagmaSat (Ghiorso & Gualda, 2015), MIMiC (Rasmussen et al, 2020), SolEx (Witham et al, 2012), Solwcad (Papale et al, 2006), VESIcal (Iacovino et al, 2021), and VolatileCalc (Newman & Lowenstern, 2002).…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Workshop report: Modelling volatile behaviour in magmas

Hughes¹,

Ding²,

Iacovino³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Volatiles are a critical component of magmas, driving volcanic eruptions, creating and modifying planetary atmospheres, and generating ore deposits. There has been an immense amount of work quantifying the solubility of individual volatile species in a wide variety of magma compositions and the creation of various modelling capabilities to look at magmatic degassing. This workshop aimed to bring together experimentalists, numerical modellers, and observational researchers with an interest in volatile solubility in magmas. Through group discussions, model demonstrations, and keynote talks, we explored the current landscape and looked for future directions. We started with a demonstration session of existing models and codes. There is currently no benchmarking for such codes, so we discussed options for a benchmarking exercise and test datasets. This was followed by discussions on future directions, covering: 1. What are the experimental gaps (e.g., melt compositions, volatile species, pressure-temperature (PT) ranges, fugacity coefficients, non-ideal mixing, etc.)?2. What do observational researchers need these codes to be able to do? 3. Can we link monitoring needs to solubility outputs?

show abstract

MafiCH: a general model for H2O–CO2 solubility in mafic magmas

Cited by 10 publications

References 44 publications

Carbonated magmatic sulfide systems: Still or sparkling?

Carbonated magmatic sulfide systems: Still or sparkling?

Bubble Formation in Magma

Workshop report: Modelling volatile behaviour in magmas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About