Plume‐related mafic volcanism and the deposition of banded iron formation

Abstract

Abstract. We have compiled a record of the geochronology of mantle plume activity between 3.8 and 1.6 Ga. Over this time period, the ages of komatiites, and those of global plumes, correlate strongly, at the 99% confidence level, with the ages of banded iron formations (BIFs). The ages of continental plumes correlate more weakly, at an overall 85% confidence level. Using the geochronological records of these events, we can define four periods characterized by mantle superplume activity. Three of these periods are also times of enhanced BIF deposition. The fourth mantle plume period may similarly be coeval with increased BIF accumulation, but the BIF chronostratigraphic resolution is not accurate enough to test this rigorously. Mantle superplume volcanism may promote BIF deposition by increasing the Fe flux to the global oceans through continental weathering and/or through submarine hydrothermal processes. It may also be enhanced by increasing the number of paleotectonic environments appropriate for BIF deposition (particularly plume-induced ocean plateaus, seamounts, and intracratonic rifts) and by promoting global anoxic, Fe-rich hydrothermal plumes in the shallow to intermediate marine water column.

Barite, BIFs and bugs: evidence for the evolution of the Earth’s early hydrosphere

“…These tables were compiled from existing literature. Table 2 2 is extensively updated from compilations by James [9], Walker et al [2], Isley [10] and Isley and Abbott [11]. It provides more constrained ages for many BIFs and includes data for BIFs not presented in the previous compilations.…”

Iron formations: A global record of Neoarchaean to Palaeoproterozoic environmental history

“…1.85 Ga, Superior-type IFs were not deposited for approximately 1.1 b.y. until precipitation of Rapitan-type IF, associated with the Sturtian glaciation and extensional magmatism linked to the breakup of Rodinia (Isley and Abbott, 1999;Huston and Logan, 2004;Klein, 2005;Slack and Cannon, 2009). This gap has been explained by a shift to fully oxic (Holland, 1984), sulfidic (Canfield, 1998), or suboxic (Slack et al, 2007;2009) deep-ocean conditions.…”

“…Deposition of these IFs occurred on a reactivated continental margin (Krapež et al, 2003), followed by a rise in sea level. Isley and Abbott (1999) estimated that during those 100 m.y., perhaps as much as 60% of the global volume of preserved IF was deposited.…”

“…Building on the premise of a hydrothermal iron source, Isley and Abbott (1999) suggested a direct link between mantle plume activity between 3.8 and 1.8 Ga and global IF deposition. It is now widely accepted that the deposition of large, economically important IF coincided in time with mantle plume breakout events, as recorded by the secular distribution of large igneous provinces (LIPs), dike swarms, and submarine-emplaced mafic volcanic rocks (e.g., Isley and Abbott, 1999;Rasmussen et al, 2012), as well as that of major mantle plume events (Viehmann et al, 2015).…”

“…It is now widely accepted that the deposition of large, economically important IF coincided in time with mantle plume breakout events, as recorded by the secular distribution of large igneous provinces (LIPs), dike swarms, and submarine-emplaced mafic volcanic rocks (e.g., Isley and Abbott, 1999;Rasmussen et al, 2012), as well as that of major mantle plume events (Viehmann et al, 2015). LIPs are linked to relatively short-lived (<10-20 Myr) igneous events with magma having been produced in the mantle, resulting in relatively rapid intrusion and eruption of high volumes of mafic to ultramafic magma (Coffin and Eldholm, 1994;Ernst and Buchan, 2001).…”