Introduction to U-Pb geochronology

with a focus on “high-precision” ID-TIMS

Blair Schoene

Earthscope GSA geochronology shortcourse

Introduction to U-Pb geochronology, with a focus on “high-precision” ID-TIMS

Outline:

1. The basics – decay chains, dates, and data visualization

2. Geochemistry of U and Pb - what materials can we

date?

3. Analytical techniques

4. Focus on high-precision U-Pb geochronology

1. Methodology
2. Case studies
 Decay of U and Th to Pb
124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146
Neutron number (N) 234U 235U 238U
U 92 246 ka 0.7 Ga 4.5 Ga
238
U 206
Pb + 8α + 6β- + Q; λ238 = 1.55125e-10 a-1
231Pa
Pa 91 234Pa
34 ka
235
U 207
Pb + 7α + 4β + Q; λ235 = 9.8485e-10 a
- -1

230Th 232Th
Th 90 227Th 228Th
75 ka
231Th
14 Ga
234Th
232
Th 208
Pb + 6α + 4β + Q; λ232 = 4.9475e-11 a
- -1

Ac 89 227Ac 228Ac
22 a
Atomic number (Z)

226Ra
Ra 88 223Ra 224Ra
1.62 ka
228Ra

Fr 87 223Fr

Rn 86 218Rn 219Rn 220Rn 222Rn

At 85 215At 218At 219At

indicates beta decay
Po 84 210Po 211Po 212Po 214Po 215Po 216Po 218Po (to isotope diagonal in indicated
direction and the same mass)
Bi 83 210Bi 211Bi 212Bi 214Bi 215Bi
230Th ~Half-life
Pb 82 206Pb 207Pb 208Pb 210Pb 211Pb 212Pb 214Pb 75 ka (only indicated if >10 a)
22 a

Tl 81 206Tl 207Tl 208Tl 210Tl

indicates alpha decay
(to isotope diagonal in indicated
Hg 80 206Hg
direction and 4 a.m.u. less)
Three isochron equations for the three systems

! 206 Pb $ ! 206 Pb $ ! 238U $

# 204 & = # 204 & + # 204 & ⋅ ( e −1)
λ 238⋅t
(1)
" Pb %total " Pb %init. " Pb %now

! 207 Pb $ ! 207 Pb $ ! 235U $

# 204 & = # 204 & + # 204 & ⋅ ( e −1)
λ 235⋅t

" Pb %total " Pb %init. " Pb %now (2)

! 208 Pb $ ! 208 Pb $ ! 232Th $

# 204 & = # 204 & + # 204 & ⋅ ( e −1)
λ 232⋅t
(3)
" Pb %total " Pb %init. " Pb %now

plus one extra:

! 207 Pb $ ! 207 Pb $
# 204 & − # 204 &
" Pb %total " Pb %init.
=
1
⋅
( e λ 235⋅t −1)
(4)
! 206 Pb $ ! 206 Pb $ 137.82 ( e λ 238⋅t −1)
# 204 & − # 204 &
" Pb %total " Pb %init.

slope of the isochron:

1 (⋅ eλ 235⋅t −1)
137.82 ( e λ 238⋅t −1)
Correcting for initial daughter product (common Pb)

! 206 Pb $ ! 206 Pb $ ! 238U $

# 204 & = # 204 & + # 204 &
" Pb %total " Pb %init. " Pb %now
⋅ ( e λ 238⋅t
−1)

1) ignore it because there is so much radiogenic Pb relative to Pbc (either

because the mineral is old or U-rich)

2) use isochron methods to solve for the composition of Pbc (if the minerals meet
the requirements of an isochron)

3) use a co-existing low-U phase to measure the composition of Pbc

4) estimate it using a “bulk earth” Pb evolution model (e.g. Stacey and Kramers)
 testing closed-system behavior:
the concordia diagram

238 206
U→ Pb t1/ 2 ≈ 4.5Gyr
235 207 t1/ 2 ≈ 0.7Gyr
U→ Pb
206
Pb €
238
= exp( λ238 t ) −1
U
€
207
Pb
235
= exp( λ235 t ) −1
U

note that common lead

correction is already made!
Using the concordia diagram
The  wetherhill  concordia  diagram  

The  Tera-­‐Wasserburg  concordia  diagram  

What materials can we date?
Chemistry of U, Th and Pb
Geochemistry  of  U,  Th  and  Pb  

U4+  

1.05  Å  

Th4+  

1.10  Å   Pb2+  

1.32  Å  
 Minerals used in U-Th-Pb dating
Mineral Formula U content Th/U Common Pb Rock
(ppm) (ppm) Type
Zircon Zr SiO4 1 - >10,000 0.1-2 <1 most

Titanite CaTiOSiO4 4 -500 0.5-20 5 -40 k,c,a,m,ig,

(sphene) mp,
gp,hv,
gn,sk
Monazite (Ce,La,Th)PO4 282 - >50,000 5-1000 < 10 mp,sg,
hv,gp
Xenotime YPO4 5,000 - 30,000 0.1-2 <5 gp,sg
Thorite ThSiO4 > 50,000 huge <2 gp,sg
Allanite (Ca,Ce)2(Fe+2,Fe+3) 130- 600 2-200 5 -30 ig,gp,sk
Al2O•OH[Si2O7] [SiO4]

Perovskite (Ca,Na,Fe+2,Ce) 21 -348 < 2- 90 k,c

(Ti,Nb)O3
Baddeleyite ZrO2 58 - 3410 <0.2 <5 k,c,um,
m,a
Rutile TiO2 < 1 - 390 0.1-5 < 2-10 gp,gn, hv
Apatite Ca5(PO4)3(OH,F,Cl) 8 -114 2-20 < 5-30 most

k=kimberlite, c = carbonatite, a=alkaline, m = mafic, ig = I-type granitoids, sg = s-type granitoids, mp = metapelites,

hv=hydrothermal veins, gp=granitic pegmatites, leucogranites, sk=skarn
U-­‐Pb  geochronology  analyEcal  techniques  

106 2.0
A ID-TIMS
10 5

reported precision (%)

1.6

sample weight (µg)

104
1.2
103
0.8
102

10 0.4

publication year
1 0
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
31
B SHRIMP/SIMS 4.0
26

reported precision (%)

sample weight (ng)
3.5
21

16 3.0
11
2.5
6
publication year
1 2.0
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
60
C LA-ICPMS 16
50 14

laser spot diameter (µm)

reported precision (%)

12
40
10
30 8

20 6
4
10
2
publication year
0 0
1995 2000 2005 2010
Imaging of chemical zoning – important for guiding ID-TIMS geochronology
Zircon with inherited cores (to be Zircon without cores (to be
avoided or microsampled) dated or microsampled)

CL images

• Detection of age domains in complex zircon

Slide courtesy of J. Crowley
 CA-ID-TIMS U-Pb on zircon
Zircon  in  grain  mount  

100 µm Separate  U  +  Pb  from  other  elements  

Load  onto  filament,  put  into  

mass  spectrometer  

TIMS  lab  at  Princeton  

 A thermal ionization mass spectrometer (TIMS)

analyzer

An IsotopX Phoenix62 at Princeton University

magnet

source
Footprint is ~2 x 1 m
Why is precision so good with TIMS?

1. Stable ion beams for long periods of time: lots of data

~  4  hrs  
Why is precision so good with TIMS?

2. Isotope dilution allows us to measured Pb and U separately, and thus not worry about
interelemental fractionation during measurements (which is a limiting factor in precision of
other techniques).

How many red and

blue balls are there in
the grey box if you
don’t know the size of
the box?

Cartoon courtesy of D. Condon

What is isotope dilution ?
Measure the ratio of
the reds to blue – this
is what mass
spectrometers do well
Answer:
Red/blue = 1.00

Problem: cannot measure U and

Pb at the same time in a TIMS,
so you need moles, not ratios

Slide courtesy of D. Condon

What is isotope dilution ? Take 100 yellow balls and
mix them into the box
thoroughly then re-
measure the ratios of all
the balls
measure:
Yellow/red = 0.05
So how many blue balls
are there?
If you mix a tracer solution
containing both “yellow” U
and Pb into your sample, and
measure them separately,
then you know moles of each
– accuracy of date then
depends on how well you
know the ratio of Pb and U in
your tracer solution
Application 1: calibration of the geologic timescale and earth history
 GSA GEOLOGIC TIME SCALE v. 4.0

CENOZOIC MESOZOIC PALEOZOIC PRECAMBRIAN

MAGNETIC MAGNETIC BDY.
AGE POLARITY PICKS AGE POLARITY PICKS AGE PICKS AGE
PERIOD EPOCH AGE PERIOD EPOCH AGE PERIOD EPOCH AGE EON ERA PERIOD AGES

CHRON.
(Ma) (Ma)
CHRON.

(Ma) (Ma)

ANOM.
(Ma) (Ma) (Ma)
ANOM.

HIST
HIST.

(Ma)
1 C1 QUATER-
HOLOCENE
0.01 30 C30 66.0 541
NARY PLEISTOCENE* CALABRIAN
1.8 31 C31 MAASTRICHTIAN 252 EDIACARAN
2 C2 GELASIAN
2.6 70 Lopin- CHANGHSINGIAN
254
PIACENZIAN 32 C32 72.1 635
2A C2A
PLIOCENE 3.6 gian WUCHIAPINGIAN
260 260
ZANCLEAN 33
CAPITANIAN NEOPRO-

PERMIAN
5 3 C3 CAMPANIAN Guada- 265 750 CRYOGENIAN
5.3

CRETACEOUS
C33
80 WORDIAN 269 TEROZOIC
3A C3A MESSINIAN LATE lupian ROADIAN 850
7.2 83.6 272
SANTONIAN KUNGURIAN
4 C4 86.3
280 279 TONIAN
CONIACIAN
NEOGENE

4A
TORTONIAN 90 89.8 Cisura-

PROTEROZOIC
C4A
ARTINSKIAN 1000 1000
10 5 TURONIAN lian
C5 93.9 290
MIOCENE

11.6 CENOMANIAN SAKMARIAN STENIAN

296
SERRAVALLIAN 34 C34 ASSELIAN 299
5A 100 100 300 GZHELIAN 1200
C5A
13.8 LATE 304

CARBONIFEROUS
PENNSYL-
KASIMOVIAN 307 1250 MESOPRO-

VANIAN
15 5B C5B LANGHIAN ALBIAN MOSCOVIAN ECTASIAN
MIDDLE TEROZOIC
5C C5C 16.0 110 315
1400
5D C5D 113 320 EARLY BASHKIRIAN
5E C5E BURDIGALIAN 323
1500 CALYMMIAN
6 C6 APTIAN LATE SERPUKHOVIAN
20 120 331

SIPPIAN
20.4

MISSIS-
6A C6A EARLY 1600
M0r
6B C6B AQUITANIAN M1 126 340 MIDDLE VISEAN
23.0 M3 BARREMIAN STATHERIAN
6C C6C 130 M5 131 347 1750
HAUTERIVIAN EARLY TOURNAISIAN 1800
OLIGOCENE

7 C7 134
25 7A C7A M10 359
8 C8 CHATTIAN VALANGINIAN
M12 360
140 M14 139 FAMENNIAN OROSIRIAN
9 C9 M16
28.1 BERRIASIAN 2000
PALEOPRO-

DEVONIAN
10 C10 M18
145 LATE 372 2050
M20
30 11 C11 TEROZOIC
150 M22 TITHONIAN FRASNIAN
380
12
C12
RUPELIAN LATE
152 383 RHYACIAN
M25
KIMMERIDGIAN GIVETIAN
JURASSIC

MIDDLE 388 2250

M29 157 EIFELIAN
13 393 2300
C13 33.9 160 OXFORDIAN
35 15 C15 164 400 EMSIAN SIDERIAN
16 C16 PRIABONIAN CALLOVIAN 166
RAPID POLARITY CHANGES

BATHONIAN EARLY 408

17 MIDDLE 168 PRAGIAN 411 2500 2500
C17
37.8
170 BAJOCIAN 170
AALENIAN LOCHKOVIAN
PALEOGENE

18 174 419
C18 BARTONIAN 420 PRIDOLI 423

ORDOVICIAN SILURIAN
40 LUDFORDIAN NEOARCHEAN
19 LUDLOW 426
C19 41.2 180 TOARCIAN GORSTIAN
HOMERIAN 427
WENLOCK 430 2750
EOCENE

SHEINWOODIAN
20 183 433 2800
TELYCHIAN
LLANDO- 439
C20
EARLY
PLIENSBACHIAN 440 AERONIAN
441
LUTETIAN VERY

ARCHEAN
45 190 RHUDDANIAN
444
191 HIRNANTIAN 445
KATIAN MESO-
SINEMURIAN LATE 453
3000
21
C21 SANDBIAN ARCHEAN
47.8 199 458
200 HETTANGIAN 460
201 DARRIWILIAN
22 C22 MIDDLE
50 RHAETIAN DAPINGIAN
467 3200
470 3250
23 YPRESIAN 209 FLOIAN
TRIASSIC

C23
210
EARLY 478
480 TREMADOCIAN
24
485
PALEO-
55
C24 LATE NORIAN FURON- AGE 10 490 ARCHEAN
220 JIANGSHANIAN
56.0 GIAN 494 3500
PAIBIAN
PALEOCENE

25 497
C25
THANETIAN 500 GUZHANGIAN
CAMBRIAN

501 3600
26 228 Epoch 3 DRUMIAN
230 AGE 5 505
C26 59.2 509
60 SELANDIAN CARNIAN AGE 4
3750
Epoch 2 514 EOARCHEAN
61.6 237 AGE 3
27
LADINIAN 520
C27 240 521
MIDDLE 241 AGE 2
28 C28
DANIAN ANISIAN TERRE- 529 4000 4000
65
29 247 NEUVIAN FORTUNIAN
C29
EARLY OLENEKIAN 250 HADEAN
66.0 250 INDUAN 540 541
30 C30 252
When precision and accuracy really matter….

Examples of ashbed geochronology from the stratigraphic record.

 Why  the  need  for  higher  precision?  
Volcanism   exEncEon   environment  
     
     

Schoene  et  al.,  2010a  

 ApplicaEon  2:  evoluEon  of  magmaEc  systems  

What  are  the  rates  of  mass  and  heat  

transport  in  the  crust?  
 
What  are  the  rheological  properEes  of  the  
crust  during  orogenesis?  
 
What  are  Emescales  of  melt  generaEon,  
storage  and  transport  in  the  lithosphere?  
 
How  are  batholiths  made?  
 
Why  do  super  volcano  erupEons  occur?  
 32.0
 
Pb/238U zircon date (Ma)

100 μm
31.5

31.0
N

30.5
5’

10 km
°4
206

46

6.9
PFS 50 μm
30.0 9°15’ a 9°30’ 9°45’
 IntegraEon  of  ID-­‐TIMS  with  mineral  chemistry  helps  generate  petrologic  models  

First do laser ablation for zircon geochemistry, then Huckleberry Ridge Tuff from geology.gsapub
Downloaded
do ID-TIMS U-Pb geochron
HRT TIMS ages (all)
860
A HRT TIMS ages (young)
T.A. Rivera et al. / Chemical Geology 345 (2013)
840 87–98 HRT 40Ar/39Ar age (young)
Alder Creek Rhyolite SRB TIMS ages (all)

Ti-in zircon T (ºC)

relative probability
820
0.40 less fractionated
800 magma was injected into the Geysers–Cobb M
0.35
Group A
Group B
A 780
magmatic system at ca. 1.2 Ma. Although basaltic vents are not p
760
within the Geysers-Clear
740
Lake Volcanic FieldHRT (Hearn
SRB et al., 1981
0.30 CD1
nearly coeval
720 basaltic vents exist (e.g. Caldwell Pines; Hamme
CD2
0.25 DePaolo, 2006;
700 Schmitt et al., 2006), as well as noritic CD3 to gabbr
Eu/Eu*

liths entrained
680 in the mafic rocks that are evidence for mafic int
0.20 2.04 2.08 2.12 2.16 2.20 2.24 2.28
depth (Stimac, 1993; Stimac et Ageal.,(Ma)
1993). This is supported by
Figure
versus
900
0.15 ical evidence
880 for
B small-bodied, mafic intrusions emplaced SRB—Sin t
HRT—H
crust at depths of 12–24 km, with a northwesterly orientation

Ti-in zircon T (ºC)

860 Tuff; TI
0.10 840 ization
et al., 1998; Stimac et al., 2001). Cobb Mountain straddles try. one
B: T
820
0.05 northwest-trending faults, which may have acted as the co
Eu anom
800 Grain interiors lumines
840 both intruding mafic magmas and the erupting rhyoliteHRT
780 (Stimzi
760 morpho
2001). The 740
abundance of older, low-T zircon antecrysts in andthe
B demands contributions to silicic magma generation
las
tively c
820 720 Core-rim tie line from mass
earlie s
lized, and 700
subsequently remelted, plutons. Thus, the geolog coded
800 680 main.
geophysical data are
0.05 consistent
0.10 0.15 with zircon-based
0.30 0.35 evidence for
TOC (TiZR)

0 0.20 0.25 0.40

Eu/Eu*
780 charge into the Geysers–Cobb
Truncations Mountain magma system. This
C Dark
was concomitant with partial remelting bandsof earlier intrusive
}
43
760 Geysers Plutonic Complex
1 as recorded in Group B and rapid di
tion as recorded by Group A to produce rhyodacite to rhyolite
740 42 26
53
including the ACR (Schmitt et al., 2003a).
2 41 206 238 }
720 The weighted mean CA-TIMS Pb/ U date for the youn
27 54
ulation among the Group A zircon of 1.1978 ± 0.0046 Ma is sig
Overgrowths Melt
700 ly younger than the peak of the zirconInclusion
date distribution determ
1.16 1.18 1.20 1.22 1.24 1.26 1.28 1.30 1.32 1.34
Age (Ma) IMP (Schmitt et al., 2003a). There are likely three factors for th
Rivera et al (2013) ence: (1) the relativelyRivera et al (2014)
minor abundance of Group A zircon,
 U- Th disequilibrium using Th/Umelt of 2.2 (Schmitz and Bowring, 2001). ∆t denotes age difference between oldest and youngest
date of each sample. Probability density functions show distribution of 206Pb/238U dates. FCT—Fish Canyon Tuff; NCD—Nutras Creek
Integration
MLX—andesite of B:
enclave. ID-TIMS with
Caldera map of mineral
the Centralchemistry helps
San Juan caldera generate
cluster petrologic
showing locations models
of samples analyzed in this study
map (top left) shows location of San Juan volcanic field (SJVF) within the state of Colorado. CPC—Cochetopa Park caldera; SLC—Sa
complex; SR—South River caldera.
U-Pb TIMS-TEA (trace element analysis)

solidification prior to late reheating (Fig.

A Fish Canyon Tuff
Nutras Creek Dacite
B modeling involves calculation of evolvin
28.6

Andesite enclave 12 composition in response to fractional cr

Number
Pb/238U date (Ma)

zation followed by inversion of melt co

8 εHf tions to the composition of zircons in e
rium with the modeled melt. The startin
4
28.4

composition was taken to be the melt in e

rium with the zircon with lowest Yb/Dy
-9.6 -8.0 -6.4 mum melt fraction; experimentally dete
partition coefficients of Rubatto and He
2007). The trace element composition
28.2
206

bulk fractionating assemblage was cal

Yb/Dy Th/U from published trace element data of ma
2 4 6 8 accessory minerals (Bachmann et al., 20
0.8 1.2 1.6
modal abundances (Bachmann et al., 20
Figure 2. Trace element
Wotzlaw and Hf-isotopic compositions of U-Pb dated zircons. Yb/Dy (A) and
et al., 2013 which titanite plays the key role (Figs
Th/U (B) of U-Pb–dated zircons are plotted against their 206Pb/238U date. Uncertainties are
4). The bulk partition coefficient, defi
shown at 2σ confidence level. Yellow and orange bars are the calculated compositional ranges
of zircons in equilibrium with interstitial glass and whole rocks, respectively, on the basis of the ratio of the bulk fractionating asse
experimentally determined partition coefficients (Rubatto and Hermann, 2007) and published to initial melt composition, has been he
glass and whole-rock analyses (Bachmann et al., 2002, 2005). Inset in B shows histogram of stant throughout the model calculation
Hf isotopic compositions (expressed as εHf) for Fish Canyon and andesite enclave zircons. the small temperature interval between
saturation (~760 °C) and the solidus (~6
in conjunction with the limited major-e
The trace element budget of the Fish Canyon The parabolic Yb/Dy trend and sympathetic variation during crystallization of a g
magma is largely controlled by volumetrically decrease/increase in Th/U in zircon through time near-minimum melt. Using
Schoene these
et al., input
2010
minor titanite (≤1 vol%; Fig. 3). The extreme is interpreted as (1) a decrease in temperature and eters, we modeled evolving melt compo
compatibilities of various trace elements (rare increasing crystallization from ca. 28.7–28.6 Ma in response to fractional crystallization.
earth elements [REEs], Y, Th) in titanite render to ca. 28.4 Ma, hence increasing titanite and zir- evolving melt compositions were inverte
 plagioclase at the highest pressures of plagiocla
Application 3: calibrating the Archean existence (Fig. 3). The prograde garnet generatio
this study is indeed calcic (35–40% grossular) and co
pure sodic endmember albitic plagioclase (An3–1
reaction is steeply orientated in P–Tspace in the area
the high-pressure plagioclase phase boundary.
Field observations, structural geology, and petrology of the same rocks have number Mg# (Mg/Mg þ Fe) in garnet scales invers
ture away from this phase boundary. The low M
resulted in very different tectonic models for Archean terranes prograde garnet in these rock compositions (Mg#
06 M.J. Van Kranendonk et al. / Precambrian Research 131 (2004) 173–211

melting of TTG gneisses (magmatic diapirism) into

the cores of progressively evolving domes (e.g. MEGC
and CDGC; Fig. 12). In this model, the partial melts
of the TTG were forced laterally out from underneath
areas of thicker, sinking greenstones and rose up pre-
existing topographic perturbations in the sheeted sill
complex that were being steepened by the combina-
tion of greenstone sinking and transfer of granitoid
mass (Fig. 19b; Pawley et al., this issue). The par-
tial melts accumulated upwards and were emplaced
as weakly deformed plutons into the cores of rising
granitoid complexes where they crystallised on cool-
ing and inhibited completion of the overturn process.
The transfer of heat into the cores of the domes by
this process, within greenstones of lower thermal con-
ductivity, accounts for the thermal anomaly associated
with the domes as documented by Bickle et al. (1985)
(cf. Allen and Chamberlain, 1989).
Once established, the dome-and-basin geometry
was re-activated and amplified by subsequent ther-
motectonic events, regardless of tectonic origin, at
punctuated intervals throughout the history of the
craton. Different granitoid complexes contain dif-
ferent proportions of the different aged-suites (Van
Kranendonk et al., 2002), suggesting that individual
domes experienced the dominant component of uplift
at different times, similar to the way in which salt di-
apirs rise (Jackson et al., 1990). Different domes rose
g. 19. Schematic model of partial convective overturn for the Core-complex/extensional
to different crustal levels depending on the amount of Figure 4 | Geodynamic sketch summarizing the inferre
“vertical” tectonics in
ast Pilbara. (A) Stage 1 (3470–3430 Ma): generation of a gravi-
Subduction/accretion in
of the southern Barberton terrane, and the associated
tionally stable, layered crust through emplacement of a sheeted Tectonics in the Pilbara craton
melt that accumulated and was transported upwards
evolution. a–c, Circles lettered A, B and C correspond
the Pilbara craton
TG sill complex into greenstones of the Coonterunah and lower
Warrawoona Groups. Domes are initiated at felsic volcanic erup-
in the domes. The tectonic events that drove episodes
Zegers
of partial et al., overturn
convective 1999 include thermal in- the Kaapvaal craton
(Ts) formation of the Tjakastad schist belt10, the ISZ sam
Van(B)Kranendonk etMa):
al., eruption
2004 of the 5–8 km and the Schapenburg greenstone belt13, respectively. IF,
ve centres. Stage 2 (3340–3315 cubation at 3325–3308 Ma (Sandiford et al., 2004), Moyen et al., 2006
ick Euro Basalt instigates an inverted crustal density profile and

One of the less well known rheological parameters
is the yield stress τy. Our default value was rather
Numerical modeling can make predictions for tectonics if one makes it hotter… arbitrarily chosen to be τy = 200 MPa. In a first
N. Thébaud, P.F. Rey / Precambrian Research 229 (2013) 93–104
experiment, we reduce τy to 100 MPa. Fig. 3 shows the
99
resulting effect on the subduction dynamics for different
But can we test these models with only structural geometries, finite strain mantle temperatures. For ΔTpot = 0 and 100 K, this
and geochronology with ±10-20 Myr uncertainties?
subduction completely, but its rather
(once every 0.75 Ma in this case) on
We also performed calculations
the yield stress: τy = 400 MPa (res
1 GPa (Fig. 4). Such large yield s
representative for Peierl's creep a
deformation mechanism (Karato,

Fig. 4. Initial settings (top box) and snapshots of the numerical experiment from t0 + 140 to t0 + 158 myr following the emplacement of the Kelly Group at t0 + 140 myr. The
history from t0 is t0 + 140 myr is not shown. This period corresponds to the progressive emplacement of the greenstone cover, and to a warming up of the crust. During
this time there is with little to no deformation. Thickness variations of the lower Warrawoona greenstone speedup initiation of sagduction. Two circular red markers

“vertical” tectonics in
record the horizontal versus vertical motions as well as the magnitude of shortening in the greenstone cover. From t0 + 140 to t0 + 158 myr, gravity-driven shortening above
the downwelling region is >60%. Blue shading shows post yielding plastic strain. Arrows pointing at passive vertical markers in the basement document the deformation
pattern.
Subduction/accretion
the Pilbara craton Van Hunen and Van der Berg., 2008
Thebaud and Rey, 2013
Reducing age uncertainties – using the 207Pb/206Pb chronometer

MaWnson  1987  
Reducing age uncertainties – using the 207Pb/206Pb chronometer

 
Using  the  207Pb/206Pb  date,  uncertainEes  on  low-­‐N  weighted-­‐mean  of  0.01-­‐0.02%  
are possible!
Obtaining high-precision dates on Archean rocks is possible…and necessary!

C
A B 3236
12 96

10 94 3232

Pb/206Pb date (Ma)

Pb/238U date (Ma)
8 92
Aucanquilcha Volcanic 3228
Ar/39Ar date (Ma)

Cluster, Chile
6 90
3224
4 88
206

2 3220

207
86 Tuolumne Batholith, Usutu intrusive suite,
40

California Swaziland
0 84 3216

Comparison between dates from Phanerozoic and Archean igneous rocks

Further reading (review papers) on ID-TIMS U-Pb geochronology:

Bowring,  S.  A.,  and  Schmitz,  M.  D.,  2003,  High-­‐precision  U-­‐Pb  zircon  geochronology  and  the  straEgraphic  
record,  in  Hanchar,  J.  M.,  and  Hoskin,  P.  W.  O.,  eds.,  Zircon,  Volume  53:    Washington,  D.C.,  Mineralogical  
Society  of  America,  p.  305-­‐326.  
 
Bowring,  S.  A.,  Schoene,  B.,  Crowley,  J.  L.,  Ramezani,  J.,  and  Condon,  D.  C.,  2006,  High-­‐  precision  U-­‐Pb  
zircon  geochronology  and  the  straEgraphic  record:  progress  and  promise,  in  Olszewski,  T.,  ed.,  
Geochronology:  Emerging  OpportuniEes,  Paleontological  Society    Short  Course,  Volume  12:  Philidelphia,  
PA,  The  Paleontological  Society  p.  25-­‐45.  
 
Parrish,  R.  R.,  and  Noble,  S.  R.,  2003,  Zircon  U-­‐Th-­‐Pb  geochronology  by  isotope  diluEon  –  thermal  
ionizaEon  mass  spectrometry  (ID-­‐TIMS),  in  Hanchar,  J.  M.,  and  Hoskin,  P.  W.  O.,  eds.,  Zircon,  Volume  53:  
Washington,  D.C.,  Mineralogical  Society  of  America,  p.  183-­‐213.  
 
Schoene,  B.,  2014,  U-­‐Th-­‐Pb  geochronology,  in  Rudnick,  R.,  ed.,  TreaEse  on  Geochemistry,  Volume  4.10:  
Oxford,  U.K.,  Elsevier,  p.  341-­‐378.  
 
Corfu  
MaWnson  
Schaltegger