Physics
Scientific paper
Sep 2000
adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=2000m%26ps...35.1087b&link_type=abstract
Meteoritics & Planetary Science, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 1087-1100 (2000).
Physics
35
Scientific paper
We report on major and trace element analyses of 17 eucrites, including three cumulate eucrites (Binda, Moore County, and Serra de Magé), determined by, respectively, ICP-AES and ICP-MS. The results obtained for Binda and Moore County are consistent with the model of Treiman (1997) for the formation of cumulate eucrites, which holds that these meteorites were produced from a eucritic melt. Our sample of Serra de Magé contains unusually large amounts of pyroxene and probably an accessory phase rich in HREEs and is therefore not representative of this eucrite as known from literature data. Our results for the noncumulate eucrites Bereba, Bouvante, Cachari, Caldera, Camel Donga, Ibitira, Jonzac, Juvinas, Lakangaon, Millbillillie, Padvarninkai, Pasamonte, Sioux County and Stannern are in good agreement with literature data. The observed decoupling between major and trace elements for noncumulate eucrites can be explained by in-situ crystallization during the differentiation of an asteroidal magma ocean. This model can further account for both the Nuevo Laredo and the Stannern trends but has as a consequence that none of the analyzed eucrites represents a primary melt.
Barrat Jean-Alix
Blichert-Toft Janne
Gillet Ph.
Keller Frank
No associations
LandOfFree
The differentiation of eucrites: The role of in situ crystallization does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.
If you have personal experience with The differentiation of eucrites: The role of in situ crystallization, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and The differentiation of eucrites: The role of in situ crystallization will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-1386990