Professional Documents
Culture Documents
net/publication/321732517
CITATIONS READS
12 8,127
5 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Ralf O. Maxeiner on 11 December 2017.
Abstract
Much of northern Saskatchewan has been affected by upper amphibolite- to granulite-facies metamorphism and consequently
was subjected to partial melting processes, which led to the formation of migmatites. This paper is written as a guide to anyone
working on Saskatchewan migmatites, in order to convey a uniform language to describe such rocks and their textures.
A migmatite is a rock produced under high-grade metamorphic conditions by melting or partial melting of a pre-existing rock in
the continental or oceanic crust, irrespective of proportion of melt. Crustal anatexis is generally accompanied by deformation,
which can help facilitate other processes such as separation of melt from the solid phase and crystal fractionation. Paleosome is
that part of a migmatite that was not affected by partial melting, and in which pre-existing features are commonly preserved. The
neosome is the new material resulting from the partial melting process. It typically comprises two components: a light-coloured
part (leucosome) that is dominantly quartzofeldspathic or feldspathic in composition, and a dark-coloured part (melanosome) that
is enriched in ferromagnesian, aluminous and/or calcic minerals. Leucosome can be in situ, in-source or injected.
Determination of a migmatite’s correct protolith (precursor of a modified, metamorphic rock) should be attempted because this is
crucial to unravelling lithotectonic history. In situations where this is impossible, a name containing mineralogical, compositional,
and/or textural descriptive terminology can be used. One aspect that complicates determination of protoliths is the amount of
neosome. In cases where a migmatite has not lost structural cohesion, which typically takes place at 26 to 60% neosome, it is
considered a metatexite. A migmatite that has largely lost structural cohesion and is predominantly composed of neosome
(generally >60%) with minor but variable amounts of melanosome and/or resisters is called a diatexite. Metatexitic and diatexitic
rocks can be further subdivided based on a number of descriptive textural terms.
Keywords: migmatite, rock classification, terminology, Saskatchewan, metamorphism, anatexis, partial melting, protolith,
metatexite, diatexite
1. Introduction
Much of the Canadian Shield currently exposed in northern Saskatchewan has been affected by partial melting
resulting from upper amphibolite- to granulite-facies metamorphic conditions (Figure 1). Over the almost seven
decades that Saskatchewan Geological Survey (SGS) geologists and affiliated researchers have systematically
mapped these rocks, geologists worldwide have struggled to understand the geological processes involved in what
we now understand as partial melting. In the early days, metamorphic rocks were commonly named based on their
mineral make-up (e.g., hornblende-plagioclase gneiss, muscovite schist), and rocks apparently containing both
supracrustal and plutonic components were thought to have been the product of a poorly understood process termed
‘granitization’. Much has changed since that time. Geologists are rarely content with mineral-based rock terms. This
information continues to be conveyed in textural descriptions and/or map legends, but it has become preferable to
name rocks based on their interpreted protolith wherever possible. A great deal of work has also been conducted on
1Saskatchewan Ministry of the Economy, Saskatchewan Geological Survey, 1000-2103 11th Avenue, Regina, SK S4P 3Z8
2Formerly Saskatchewan Geological Survey; currently Northwest Territories Geological Survey, Industry, Tourism and Investment, P.O. Box 1320, Yellowknife,
NT X1A 2L9
Although the Saskatchewan Ministry of the Economy has exercised all reasonable care in the compilation, interpretation and production of this product, it is not
possible to ensure total accuracy, and all persons who rely on the information contained herein do so at their own risk. The Saskatchewan Ministry of the
Economy and the Government of Saskatchewan do not accept liability for any errors, omissions or inaccuracies that may be included in, or derived from, this
product.
Figure 1 – Metamorphic map for the Canadian Shield of northern Saskatchewan; major plutonic complexes are not shown as
they do not generally provide sufficient information to establish metamorphic facies.
2. Terminology
Going forward, the Saskatchewan Geological Survey recommends that this guide be used by Survey geologists and
clients as a reference for naming migmatitic rocks in the province. This publication is meant to be a hands-on guide,
and assumes a basic understanding of metamorphic reactions and processes. Readers interested in the processes
of migmatite formation and recent theories on granite formation can refer to Sawyer (2008, and references therein)
as well as other journal publications (e.g., Milord et al., 2001; Weinberg and Mark, 2008; Brown, 2013; Weinberg et
al., 2015).
This guide refers to features of migmatites that can be observed from a scale of hand samples to outcrops.
Microscale features are not taken into account in this classification, but we recognize that they do play an important
part in determining the petrogenetic history of any rock, including migmatites.
b) Anatexis
Anatexis is the process of partial melting resulting from thermotectonic processes in the continental or oceanic crust.
Ever since it was coined at the beginning of the 20th century, the term ‘anatexis’ has created much controversy, and
interesting accounts of debates between Sederholm (1907) and Holmquist (1916) can be found in Mehnert (1968).
Most of these early debates focused on ‘granitization’ and the question of whether or not granite has a magmatic
origin (Sederholm, 1907; Holmquist, 1916; Mehnert, 1968; Ashworth, 1985). More specifically, researchers
questioned whether ‘nonmagmatic granite’ formed under ‘wet’ or ‘dry’ conditions. Sawyer (2008) presents a brief and
insightful discussion of this debate and how it led to Mehnert’s (1968) non-genetic descriptive terminology for
migmatites. Today, research into the formation and evolution of granitic magmas includes study of the geochemical
processes involved during crustal melt formation, the origin and depth of partial-melt formation, tectonic environment,
degree of partial melting, wall-rock contamination, and crystal fractionation processes (e.g., Sawyer, 1998; Jung et
al., 1999; Chappell and White, 2001; Frost et al., 2001).
Therefore, we employ the following slightly modified version of Sawyer’s (2008) definition of anatexis: Melting or
partial melting of a pre-existing rock in the continental or oceanic crust, irrespective of proportion of melt; crustal
anatexis is generally accompanied by deformation, which can help facilitate other processes such as separation of
melt from the solid phase and crystal fractionation. The Glossary of Geology (Bates and Jackson, 1987) suggests
that adjectives such as incipient, initial, intergranular, advanced, partial, differential, selective, and complete be added
as modifiers to indicate the degree/nature of melting.
c) Migmatite
The term ‘migmatite’ (Figure 2) is derived from the Greek word ‘migma’, which means mixture. In the early part of the
20th century it was applied to rocks comprising two or more components (Sederholm, 1907), irrespective of whether
or not the components were genetically related. Sederholm described ‘migmatite’ as a rock with one component
being a “schistose sediment or foliated eruptive”, and the other component having formed by “re-solution of the
material like the first or by an injection from without”. So strictly speaking, based on this early definition, any mixed
two-component rock could be termed a migmatite. Mehnert (1968) stipulated that the term be reserved for
metamorphic rocks that are composite on a megascopic scale, where one component is the country rock and the
other is a rock of plutonic appearance.
In keeping with most other modern definitions (Sawyer, 2008; Sawyer and Brown, 2008; Pawley et al., 2013), the
SGS has chosen to use the term ‘migmatite’ for rocks with two or more components, found in upper amphibolite- to
granulite-facies metamorphic areas, that contain pre-existing material (paleosome) and a new component derived by
partial melting (neosome). If possible a distinction is made between in situ migmatite, in which both components
(paleosome and neosome) are petrogenetically related, and injection migmatite, in which the neosome is injected into
an unrelated rock.
Although the term ‘migmatite’ will be used for all two-or-more-component systems derived by partial melting,
regardless of the quantity of each component, it is important to record the various proportions to fully describe the
rock and the map unit. Therefore, component proportions should be listed in unit descriptions in publications and on
map legends (e.g., “Unit contains up to 20% white to light pinkish grey granitic leucosome and up to 5%
melanosome, rich in garnet and biotite.”).
Although ‘migmatite’ can be used as a rock name, much like the term ‘gneiss’, the SGS prefers to use it as a
descriptive term (also see Robertson, 1999) and to instead name rocks based on their lithological precursors. For
example, the rock name ‘migmatitic granite’ is preferable to ‘granitic migmatite’. In the first case, the rock is
interpreted as a granite that has been partially melted. In the second case, the partially melted rock is seen as having
d) Components of a Migmatite
Paleosome is defined as that part of a migmatite that was not affected by partial melting, and in which features older
than the partial melting (i.e., bedding, layering, foliation, folding) have been preserved (Figure 2). The neosome is
the new material resulting from the partial melting process. It typically also comprises two components: a light-
coloured part (leucosome) that is dominantly quartzofeldspathic or feldspathic in composition (e.g., generally
enriched in silica, sodium and potassium), and a darker-coloured part (melanosome) that is enriched in
ferromagnesian, aluminous and/or calcic minerals (e.g., biotite, garnet, cordierite, orthopyroxene and hornblende).
Some light-coloured, aluminous minerals (e.g., sillimanite, cordierite) can also be found concentrated in the
melanosome. The leucosome is the part of the rock that melted, whereas the melanosome represents the
mineralogically reconfigured, solid-state residual part of the rock from which the leucosome was derived. Both are
part of the neosome and result from the partial melting process.
Anatexis of naturally occurring rocks is very complex and is greatly influenced by protolith composition and the
temperature of melting (Winkler, 1979; Yardley, 1989; Sawyer and Brown, 2008). It is beyond the scope of this paper
to discuss the science of partial melting experiments, but to better illustrate the products of anatexis, it is useful to
consider a partial melting reaction, such as the minimum melt reaction:
Muscovite + quartz + biotite + H2O = sillimanite + melt (equation 1; e.g., Thompson, 1982)
Without a further increase in temperature, the melting reaction above will stop in natural settings once all the water
has been consumed. However, further melting can occur through the breakdown of hydrous phases, in which case K-
feldspar is produced in addition to melt and sillimanite:
Muscovite + quartz = K-feldspar + sillimanite + melt (equation 2; Storre, 1972)
Therefore, typical leucosomes produced from either of the reactions above are generally leucogranitic to
trondhjemitic 3 or granodioritic to tonalitic, depending on the starting material (Winkler, 1979). The leucosome will
most commonly be enriched in alkali (i.e., K, Na) and to a lesser extent calc-alkali elements (i.e., resulting plagioclase
is generally more Na-rich than Ca-rich), but will also contain appreciable amounts of Al and Si. A certain amount of Al
and Si will move into the melt phase and combine with the alkali elements to form feldspars upon crystallization of the
melt (leucosome). Other Al will be used to make solid-state aluminous minerals in the reaction products (i.e., the
sillimanite in reactions 1 and 2). Unrequired Al will remain at the site of melting to produce sillimanite, or combine with
relatively enriched Fe and Mg to form concentrations of aluminous ferromagnesian minerals such as biotite, garnet or
cordierite.
The part of the original rock that preferentially releases the dominantly quartzofeldspathic melt component
(leucosome) becomes relatively enriched in other major elements (e.g., generally Fe, Mg, Ca). As a result, solid-state
reactions lead to concentrations of minerals like biotite, garnet, cordierite, sillimanite and orthopyroxene (or
hornblende and clinopyroxene in a more calcic system) with little feldspar due to the lack of essential alkali elements.
This concentration of ferromagnesian, aluminous and/or calcic minerals, developed in response to a partial melting
reaction, represents the melanosome (e.g., Figures 2, 3). Thus, the leucosome, melanosome and the parent rock are
petrogenetically related to each other.
Some workers prefer the term ‘residuum’ to melanosome (e.g., Sawyer, 2008; Pawley et al., 2015), partly as a way to
include some lighter-coloured aluminous residual phases such as sillimanite in the solid residual fraction. Sawyer
(2008) also noted that in some cases residuum can be dominated by light-coloured minerals such as quartz and
feldspar (e.g., the partial melting of granites); however, we prefer to include all residual mineral phases (i.e., light and
dark coloured) resulting from melt extraction under the term melanosome.
Types of Leucosome
Since the leucosome produced by partial melt reactions is in a liquid state, it can be mobile, resulting in its
segregation from the melanosome and paleosome. Three types of leucosome are differentiated based on whether it
has remained at the site of melting (in situ), migrated a small distance (in-source) or moved a large distance
(injected) from the site of melting (Figures 3, 4).
Figure 4 – Schematic sketch maps of two outcrops (intervening areas in grey not exposed) showing several map units. A) A unit
of foliated granite has produced in situ (Lu) and in-source (Lr) leucogranitic leucosome; the resulting rock is a migmatitic granite.
On a neighbouring outcrop, granitic leucosome has invaded units of tonalite and quartz diorite. As it is not possible to trace this
leucosome back to its source, this rock can be described in general terms as an injection migmatite and more specifically as a
migmatitic tonalite-quartz diorite with injected granitic leucosome (Lj). B) In the same area of upper amphibolite–facies rocks, a
layered unit of pelite, psammopelite and psammite shows the same relationships; pelitic and psammopelitic layers display in situ
leucosome (Lu) and melanosome (M). The psammitic layer has not partially melted, but because the leucosome is traceable
back to its source, it is referred to as in-source (Lr). In a neighbouring outcrop of layered psammite, quartzite and mafic volcanic
rock, granitic leucosome is not traceable back to its source and is therefore considered injected leucosome (Lj).
Some workers suggest using terms such as vein or dyke for the leucosome component of migmatitic rocks (e.g.,
Sawyer, 2008; Pawley et al., 2013), and although we do not disagree with this approach, we would emphasize that
these terms need to be used according to common definitions: e.g., a dyke is a tabular igneous intrusion that cuts
across the bedding or foliation plane of the country rock (Bates and Jackson, 1987); a vein is a mineral-filled fracture
or fault, commonly related to epigenetic hydrothermal processes (ibid).
Peritectic Minerals
Since the reactants of equations (1) and (2) contain little or no Fe or Mg, the resulting products are felsic and the melt
has an essentially granitoid composition. Granitoid melt-forming reactions for more realistic, naturally occurring rock
compositions at higher metamorphic grades involve ferromagnesian reactants such as biotite and, because of the
low solubility of Fe and Mg in the melt phase, also result in ferromagnesian phases in the products:
Biotite + plagioclase + quartz = orthopyroxene + garnet + K-feldspar + melt (equation 3; Gardien et al., 1995)
Such ferromagnesian phases are generally not part of the resulting melt (e.g., Sawyer and Brown, 2008), but are
rather produced simultaneously in the solid state and are termed peritectic phases (Figure 7).
The resulting pods of concentrated peritectic hornblende can be near-monomineralic (Figure 7). Typical peritectic
mineral pods are commonly mantled by, or otherwise spatially associated with, the variably segregated leucosome
and can in some cases be difficult to distinguish from melanosome.
e) Restite
The term ‘restite’ has historically been used for that component of a migmatite that represents the modified remnants
of a metamorphic rock that are left behind after substantial amounts of the mobile components have been removed
(Bates and Jackson, 1987; Wimmenauer and Bryhni, 2007). The difference between it and melanosome has to do
with scale. Whereas melanosome is used when dealing with migmatites at the outcrop scale, restite refers more to
entire rock units that have been substantially modified by the extraction of very large volumes of partial melt. Thus, it
is a term mainly used in the description of granulite-facies metamorphic terranes and in discussions of granite
genesis (e.g., Chappell et al., 1987; Braun et al., 1996; Maas et al., 1997; Droop et al., 2003; Dorais and Spencer,
2014). As such, the term restite will not be used in our standardized terminology for the description of outcrop-scale
migmatites.
f) Resisters
‘Resisters’ are rock types that, due to their extreme bulk compositions (e.g., mafic, ultramafic or quartz-rich rocks),
have not partially melted under the same metamorphic P–T conditions that produced migmatites in adjacent rocks
(Figure 8). Mafic rocks, quartzites and calc-silicate rocks (Figures 4A, 4B) are good examples of resisters because
their unusual compositions result in melting temperatures that are beyond the common range of metamorphic
conditions. Note that resisters may still contain injected leucosome derived from nearby partially melted rocks.
Intermediate and mafic rocks (e.g., andesites, quartz diorite) begin melting at higher temperatures than their felsic
counterparts, so it is not uncommon in a compositionally layered outcrop to find intermediate and mafic resisters
coexisting with migmatites (Figures 4, 8). Having said this, at sufficiently high metamorphic grades and especially in
the presence of water, intermediate and mafic rocks can begin to partially melt and develop a leucosome (Figure 7C).
In summary, resisters represent those compositional components of a migmatitic outcrop that were not affected by
partial melting and in which structures (foliation, folding, and layering) older than the partial melting might be
preserved (Figure 8). The characteristic that distinguishes them from other paleosome is their extremely high melting
temperature, which is a function of their composition.
4 Magnetite and titanite form due to excess Fe and Ti from the reactant biotite, which cannot all be accommodated by the peritectic hornblende.
One problem with this definition is that the degree of partial melting can be very difficult to determine. Consequently,
the main discriminating factor between metatexite and diatexite (Pattison and Harte, 1988; Sawyer, 2008) has been
changed from the degree of partial melting to the proportion of neosome present. This new criterion is not only much
easier to assess, but also addresses another aspect implied in the term ‘diatexite’. Metatexites retain their basic
structural integrity, preserving primary layering, pre-existing structural elements, and/or structures developed during
partial melting (Pawley et al., 2013). The term ‘diatexite’ is used when this pre-existing structural cohesion is largely
lost (Figure 9A). Any remaining paleosome retains its early structures, but otherwise the pre-existing structural
framework is lost due to the large volume of neosome (Figure 9A), which may be massive or exhibit new structures
formed during or subsequent to the melting event. Sawyer (2008) suggested that this transition from a migmatite that
retains its structural cohesion (metatexite) to one that does not (diatexite) occurs over a range of melt fraction
between 26% and 60%. Based on the relative ease of determining structural cohesion and the proportion of melt
neosome, the SGS has adopted this basis for the distinction of metatexite and diatexite.
Diatexites can form in situ (e.g., Figures 9A and 9B) but, given the large proportion of melt, they can also become
mobile, moving through older rock units in much the same way as igneous rocks, but distinguished from the latter by
their irregular form and minor components of associated melanosomal remnants and/or inclusions of resisters (Figure
10). Where large abundances of mobile leucosome amass, they can become mappable bodies (Figures 10C, 10D).
In such cases, the protolith of the diatexite is generally not known. In fact, such large volumes of leucosome may
amass from more than one protolith. Given the stated goal and practise of the SGS to produce interpreted protolith
maps, it is generally preferable to use metatexite and diatexite as adjectives to reflect the proportion of neosome and
degree of structural cohesion. However, given the unknown parentage of some diatexites, a rock name such as
‘anatectic granitoid’ may be preferable. Note that this does not preclude describing the rock as diatexitic.
h) Migmatitic Textures
Containing generally subordinate proportions of neosome, metatexites can take on a variety of appearances. For
example, the metatexites illustrated in Figures 11A and 11B are termed ‘stromatic’ based on the layered nature of
their paleosome, leucosome and/or melanosome. Based on their compositions and mineral assemblages, which are
typical of upper amphibolite–facies metamorphic conditions, both are examples of stromatic migmatitic
psammopelites (Figures 11A, 11B).
Stromatic metatexites are also commonly referred to as having lit-par-lit (French for ‘bed-by-bed’) textures, alluding
to the fact that the leucosome layers are parallel to each other and to the pre-existing structure of the paleosome
(Figure 11B). A ‘patch’ or ‘fleck’ metatexite (Figures 11C, 11D) is a migmatite that typically develops at the initiation
of partial melting in relatively non-layered, homogeneous rocks (e.g., mafic rocks, psammites), with leucosome
nucleating in isolated areas of a rock.
Textures in diatexitic rocks are generally related to the presence of melanosome and/or resisters. A psammitic to
pelitic sequence of sedimentary rocks that has undergone near-complete partial melting may be recognized by a
homogeneous garnet-biotite–rich granodioritic neosome, containing resisters of quartz-feldspar–rich psammite
(Figure 12A). Such resisters commonly occur as ‘rafts’ or ‘schollen’ (Figure 10C). They range in scale up to a metre,
commonly display an older foliation, and can be randomly oriented. ‘Agmatitic’ textures are generated when
prevailing neosome contains inclusions of resisters, most commonly amphibolites derived from mafic volcanic rocks
or mafic dykes (Figure 12B). In some diatexites, the neosome retains diffuse relicts of pre-existing structures and/or
paleosome; such migmatites are referred to as having ‘nebulitic’ textures (Figure 12C). Leucosome oriented in two
or more preferred directions can join together to form a stockwork or ‘net-textured’ metatexite (Figure 12D).
3. Glossary of Terms and Concise Definitions (modified from Sawyer, 2008 and Sawyer
and Brown, 2008)
Agmatite, agmatitic – A textural term to describe a breccia-like migmatitic rock in which the breccia matrix is
composed of injected leucosome. Generally an agmatitic rock will have a larger proportion of paleosome disrupted by
lesser amounts of in-source or injected leucosome. See also Schollen.
Anatectic granitoid – An ‘open-system’ partial melt/leucosome that has migrated away from its source, forming
intrusive sheets and plutons up to the scale of kilometres.
Anatexis – Melting or partial melting of a pre-existing rock in the continental or oceanic crust, irrespective of
proportion of melt.
Diatexite – A migmatite that has largely lost structural cohesion and that is predominantly composed of neosome
(generally >60%); it may contain minor amounts of melanosome as well as resisters. Diatexite can occur at the
4. Summary
Given the range of rock compositions capable of partially melting under metamorphic conditions, together with the
complexity of the partial melting process, it is not surprising that the description of migmatites is complicated and
confusing. It is hoped that this brief attempt at clarification will reduce at least some of the confusion and standardize
the way migmatite terminology is used in future publications of the Saskatchewan Geological Survey.
5. Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Charles Normand, Sean Bosman and Jason Berenyi for joining the authors in many lively
discussions during a number of in-house migmatite workshops. Though at times ‘spirited’, these sessions ultimately
helped in making this a better and more comprehensive paper. We would also like to thank Dr. Dave Pattison
6. References
Ashworth, J.R. (1985): Introduction; in Migmatites, First Edition, Ashworth, J.R. (ed.), Blackie & Son Ltd, Chapman & Hall, New
York, p.1-36.
Bates, R.L. and Jackson, J.A. (1987): Glossary of Geology, Third Edition; American Geological Institute, Alexandria, Virginia,
788p.
Braun, I., Raith, M. and Ravindra Kumar, G.R. (1996): Dehydration-melting phenomena in Leptynitic Gneisses and the
generation of leucogranites: a case study from the Kerala Khondalite belt, southern India; Journal of Petrology, v.37,
p.1285-1305.
Brodie, K., Fettes, D., Harte, B. and Schmid, R. (2007): A systematic nomenclature for metamorphic rocks: 3. Structural terms
including fault rock terms. Recommendations by the IUGS Subcommission on the Systematics of Metamorphic Rocks
(SCMR); web version of 01.02.2007 https://www.bgs.ac.uk/scmr/docs/papers/paper_3.pdf
Brown, M. (2013): Granite: from genesis to emplacement; Geological Society of America Bulletin, v.125, p.1079-1113.
Chappell, B.W. and White, A.J.R. (2001): Two contrasting granite types: 25 years later; Australian Journal of Earth Sciences,
v.46, p.827-831.
Chappell, B.W., White, A.J.R. and Wyborn, D. (1987): The importance of residual source material (restite) in granite
petrogenesis; Journal of Petrology, v.28, p.1111-1138.
Dorais, M. and Spencer, C.J. (2014): Revisiting the importance of residual source material (restite) in granite petrogenesis: the
Cardigan Pluton, New Hampshire; Lithos, v.202-203, p.237-249.
Droop, G.T.R., Clemens, J.D. and Dalrymple, D.J. (2003): Process and conditions during contact anatexis, melt escape and
restite formation: the Huntly gabbro complex, NE Scotland; Journal of Petrology, v.44, p.995-1029.
Frost, B.R., Barnes, C.G., Collins, W.J., Arculus, R.J., Ellis, D.J. and Frost, C.D. (2001): A geochemical classification for granitic
rocks; Journal of Petrology, v.42, p.2033-2048.
Gardien, V., Thompson, A.B., Grujic, D. and Ulmer, P. (1995): Experimental melting of biotite + plagioclase + quartz + muscovite
assemblages and implications for crustal melting; Journal of Geophysical Research, v.100, p.15581-15591.
Gardien, V., Thompson, A.B. and Ulmer, P. (2000): Melting of biotite + plagioclase + quartz gneisses: the role of H2O in the
stability of amphibole; Journal of Petrology, v.41, p.651-666.
Gilboy, C.F. (1982): Classification of clastic metasediments; Saskatchewan Department of Mineral Resources, Open File Report
82-3, 33p.
Gürich, G. (1905): Granit und Gneis; Himmel Erde, v.17, p.241-251.
Holmquist, P.J. (1916): Swedish Archean structures and their meaning; Bulletin of the Geological Institute Upsala, v.15, p.125-
148.
Jung, S., Hoernes, S., Masberg, P. and Hoffer, E. (1999): The petrogenesis of some migmatites and granites (Central Damara
Orogen, Namibia): evidence for disequilibrium melting, wall-rock contamination and crystal fractionation; Journal of
Petrology, v.40, p.1241-1269.
Le Bas, M.J. and Streckeisen, A. (1991): The IUGS systematics of igneous rocks; Journal of the Geological Society of London,
v.148, p.825-833.
Maas, R., Nicholls, I.A. and Legg, C. (1997): Igneous and metamorphic enclaves in the S-type Deddick Granodiorite, Lachlan
Fold Belt, SE Australia: petrographic, geochemical and Nd–Sr isotopic evidence for crustal melting and magma mixing;
Journal of Petrology, v.38, p.815-841.
Maxeiner, R.O., Gilboy, C.F. and Yeo, G.M. (1999): Classification of metamorphosed clastic sedimentary rocks: a proposal; in
Summary of Investigations 1999, Volume 1, Saskatchewan Geological Survey, Saskatchewan Energy and Mines,
Miscellaneous Report 99-4.1, p.89-92.
Mehnert, K.R. (1968): Migmatites and the Origin of Granitic Rocks; Elsevier, New York, 391p.