U-Pb systematics of monazite and xenotime: Case studies from the Paleoproterozoic of the Grand Canyon, Arizona

Monazite is accepted widely as an important U-Pb geochronometer in metamorphic terranes because it potentially preserves prograde crystallization ages. However, recent studies have shown that the U-Pb isotopic system in monazite can be influenced by a variety of processes that partially obscure the early growth history. In this paper, we attempt to interpret complex monazite and xenotime U-Pb data from three Paleoproterozoic granite dikes exposed in the Grand Canyon. Single-crystal monazite analyses from an unfoliated granite dike spread out along concordia from the crystallization age of the dike (defined by U-Pb zircon data to be 1685 +/- 1 Ma) to 1659 +/- 2 Ma, a span of 26 million years. Back-scattered electron (BSE) imaging reveals that magmatic domains within most crystals from this sample are truncated by secondary domains associated with prominent embayments at the grain margin. Fragments of a single crystal yield contrasting, concordant dates and fragments from the edges and tips of crystals yield the youngest dates. Based on these observations we suggest that the secondary domains formed at least 26 million years after the crystal formed. Monazite and xenotime dates from the second sample, a sheared dike that cross-cuts the previous dike, spread out along concordia over 16 million years and range up to 2.4% normally discordant. Again, BSE imaging reveals secondary domains that truncate both magmatic zoning and xenocrystic cores. Fragments sliced from specific domains of a previously imaged monazite crystal demonstrate that the secondary domain is 13 million years younger than the core domain. Textures revealed in BSE images suggest that the secondary domains formed by fluid-mineral interaction. Normal discordance appears to result from both radiation damage accumulated at temperatures below 300 degrees C and water-mineral interaction. Monazite data from the third sample exhibit dispersion in both the Pb-207/Pb-206 dates (1677-1690 Ma) and discordance (+1.6% to -3.1%). Reverse discordance in these monazites cannot be explained by incomplete dissolution or excess (thorogenic) Pb-206. Sliced fragments from several crystals reveal dramatic intragrain U-Pb disequilibrium that does not correlate with either Th or U concentration or position within the crystal. We suggest that reverse discordance resulted from mechanisms that involve exchange or fractionation of elemental U or elemental Pb, and that neither the U-Pb dates nor the Pb-207/Pb-206 dates are reliable indicators of the rock's crystallization age, Given the large number of processes proposed in the recent literature to explain monazite U-Pb systematics from rocks of all ages, our results can be viewed as another cautionary note for single-crystal and multi-crystal monazite geochronometry. However, we suggest that because individual crystals can preserve a temporal record of primary and secondary monazite growth, microsampling of individual monazite crystals may provide precise absolute ages on a variety of processes that operate during the prograde, peak and/or retrograde history of metamorphic terranes.