The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Sudbury Igneous Complex: A Differentiated Impact Melt Sheet
Abstract
The Sudbury structure, Ontario, is the remnant of a 1.85 Ga old impact crater, which originally had a diameter of 200 to 250 km. The Sudbury Igneous Complex occurs within the Sudbury structure. The Sudbury Igneous Complex is a 2.5- to 3.0-km-thick, ~60- × 27-km elliptical igneous-rock body, which consists of four major lithologies (from top to bottom) traditionally termed granophyre, gabbro, norite, and sublayer (sulfide- and inclusion-bearing noritic rock). With the exception of the latter, all these lithologies are continuous across the structure. Modal analyses reveal that, following the IUGS system of nomenclature, quartz gabbro samples are in fact quartz monzogabbros, a few of the norite samples are quartz gabbros, and most norite samples are quartz monzogabbros. In view of these observations, and in order to clarify the nomenclature, an updated terminology is proposed (from top to bottom): upper unit, middle unit, lower unit, and contact sublayer. The bulk composition of the Sudbury Igneous Complex, from North Range data, is granodioritic. Continuous and gradational mineralogical and geochemical variations between the lithological units are evidence that the Complex behaved as a single melt system. All the Sudbury Igneous Complex lithologies have the same light to heavy rare earth element (REE) ratio and an overall pattern of increased light REE and depleted heavy REE. The occurrence of primary hydrous minerals (hornblende and biotite), deuteric alteration, and abundant…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The SIC has been traditionally subdivided into a basal contact Sublayer, Norite, Quartz-Gabbro and Granophyre lithologies (e.g., Naldrett et al. 1970), but it is actually, on average, granodioritic in composition and its lithological phases are more felsic than this traditional nomenclature suggests (Therriault et al. 2002).”
From Observations and interpretations at Vredefort, Sudbury, and Chicxulub: Towards an empirical model of terrestrial impact basin formation (2008) · cites this paper as Therriault et al. 2002
In the citing paper
“It is now widely accepted that the SIC represents the differentiated impact-melt sheet within the impact structure (Grieve et al. 1991;Dickin et al. 1999;Therriault et al. 2002).”
From Observations and interpretations at Vredefort, Sudbury, and Chicxulub: Towards an empirical model of terrestrial impact basin formation (2008) · cites this paper as Therriault et al. 2002
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Origin of Life—Out of the Blue
Sutherland, J. D. (2016) · Angewandte Chemie International Edition · doi:10.1002/anie.201506585 · Cited by 401
GRIEVE, R. A. F., REIMOLD, W. U., MORGAN, J., RILLER, U., & PILKINGTON, M. (2008) · Meteoritics & Planetary Science · doi:10.1111/j.1945-5100.2008.tb01086.x · Cited by 90
Self-citationThe Sudbury impact layer in the Paleoproterozoic iron ranges of northern Michigan, USA
Cannon, W. F., Schulz, K. J., Horton, J. W., & Kring, D. A. (2010) · Geological Society of America Bulletin · doi:10.1130/b26517.1 · Cited by 68
Metadata
- Authors
- Therriault, A. M., Fowler, A. D., & Grieve, R. A. F.
- Venue
- Economic Geology
- Publisher
- Society of Economic Geologists, Inc.
- Published
- 2002-11-01
- Volume
- 97
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1521-1540
- ISSN
- 0361-0128
- Cited by
- 125
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review