Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-xq9c7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-09T23:38:33.721Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

1 - A brief history of komatiite studies and a discussion of komatiite nomenclature

from Part I - Background information – description of the field characteristics, mineralogy and geochemistry of komatiites

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 August 2009

Nicholas Arndt
Affiliation:
Université Joseph Fourier, Grenoble
C. Michael Lesher
Affiliation:
Laurentian University, Ontario
Steve J. Barnes
Affiliation:
Division of Exploration and Mining, CSIRO, Australia
Get access

Summary

The discovery and early investigations of komatiite

A review of reports written by field geologists in the early twentieth century reveals many references to ultramafic volcanic rocks. These rocks were identified as extrusive because of their volcanic textures and structures, and they seem to have been accepted as a normal component of Archean volcanic successions. Then, between 1920 and 1930, as Bowen and other petrologists conducted the experimental studies that led them to question the very existence of ultramafic magma (Bowen, 1928), and as the influence of these petrologists spread, descriptions of ultramafic volcanics virtually disappeared from the geological literature. There were sporadic reports of serpentinite flows in younger terranes, as reviewed by Bailey and McCallien (1953), and argument persisted about the nature and origin of ‘alpine peridotites’, but references to ultramafic lavas in Archean areas became rare. In a few Canadian papers, the texture we now know as spinifex was described, and the rocks containing these textures were interpreted as volcanic (Berry, 1940; Prest, 1950; Abraham, 1953). Similar reports appeared of ultramafic lavas in various parts of the (then) Rhodesian craton (Keep, 1929; Wiles, 1957). More commonly, however, the ultramafic rocks were interpreted as intrusive, in most cases as the lower cumulate layers of differentiated sills. This is the case for two type areas of komatiite, Barberton in South Africa and Munro Township in Canada.

Type
Chapter
Information
Komatiite , pp. 3 - 15
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×