Lyell Collection

Journal of the Geological Society

Lyell Centre  |   Lyell Collection  |   Subscriptions   |   Geological Society  |   Email alerts  |   Online bookshop  |   Help


Keywords:
Author:
Advanced search>>
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Whitehouse, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Fedo, C. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Journal of the Geological Society; 2009; v. 166; issue.2; p. 335-348;
DOI: 10.1144/0016-76492008-070
© 2009 Geological Society of London

Research Article

The Akilia Controversy: field, structural and geochronological evidence questions interpretations of >3.8 Ga life in SW Greenland

Martin J. Whitehouse1, John S. Myers2 & Christopher M. Fedo3

1 Swedish Museum of Natural History and Nordic Center for Earth Evolution (NordCEE), Box 50007, SE-104 05 Stockholm, Sweden
2 Department of Applied Geology, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, WA 6845, Australia
3 Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA

*Corresponding author (e-mail: martin.whitehouse{at}nrm.se)

Field relations, structure and geochronology demonstrate that controversial rocks on Akilia, SW Greenland, cannot host evidence of Earth's oldest life. Mafic–ultramafic gneiss that contains a layer of quartz–amphibole–pyroxene gneiss, a few metres thick, with purported biogenic graphite is not cross-cut by the protoliths of >3.82–3.65 Ga tonalitic gneiss. The contact between these gneisses is tectonic so their relative ages are unknown. Multiple episodes of intrusion and deformation in the tonalitic gneiss preceded the earliest deformation fabrics and structures seen in the mafic–ultramafic gneiss. Although previously interpreted as a volcano-sedimentary stratigraphy, the mafic–ultramafic gneiss displays no evidence of such an origin, and could be partly or wholly derived from igneous intrusions. Existing geochronology indicates that the mafic–ultramafic and qtz–am–px gneisses have ages <3.67 Ga. Metamorphic zircon in the qtz–am–px gneiss grew at c. 2.68 Ga during late Archaean high-grade events that complicate any protolith interpretation. U–Pb dating of apatite from a variety of rocks on Akilia shows that this mineral crystallized, or possibly recrystallized, at c. 1.75 Ga and it thus provides no indication of an early Archaean age for any associated graphite, regardless of whether or not the latter is biogenic.

Supplementary material: Ion microprobe U–Pb analytical methods and isotope data tables are available at http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/SUP18333.