太古宙TTG能否与埃达克岩对比？——全球数据给出的结果  

Can Archean TTG compare with Adakite？ Global data gives results

作　　者：张昌振 张旗[3] 金维浚[3] 刘学龙[1,2,6] 刘欣雨 坚润堂[5] 罗应 杨富成 王帅帅[1] 余海军 Zhang Changzhen;Zhang Qi;Jin Weijun;Liu Xuelong;Liu Xinyu;Jian Runtang;Luo Ying;Yang Fucheng;Wang Shuaishuai;Yu Haijun(Kunming University of Science and Technology,Kunming 650093;Key Laboratory of Geological ln]brmation Technology,Ministry of Natural Resources of the People＇s Repbulic of China,Beijing 100037;Institute of Geology and Geophysics,Chinese Academy of Sciences,Beifing 100029;Department of Geology,Northwest University,State Key Laboratory of Continental Dynamics,Xian 710069;Kunming Exploration and Design Research Institute of China Nonferrous Metals Industry Co.Ltd.Kunming 650051;Key Laboratory of Sanfiang Mineralization and Resource Exploration and Utilization,Ministry of Land and Resources,Kunming 650051)

机构地区：[1]昆明理工大学,昆明650093 [2]自然资源部地质信息技术重点实验室,北京100037 [3]中国科学院地质与地球物理研究所,北京100029 [4]西北大学地质学系、大陆动力学国家重点实验室,西安710069 [5]中国有色金属工业昆明勘察设计研究院有限公司,昆明650051 [6]国土资源部三江成矿作用及资源勘查利用重点实验室,昆明650051

出　　处：《地质科学》2018年第4期1254-1266,共13页Chinese Journal of Geology(Scientia Geologica Sinica)

基　　金：云南省科学技术奖“杰出贡献奖项目”专题四（编号：2017001）、自然资源部地质信息技术重点实验室开放课题（编号：KKF0201821043）、昆明理工大学矿产普查与勘探重点学科建设经费项目（编号：1407839305）、国家自然科学基金项目（编号：41862009）和云南科技领军人才计划项目（编号：2013HA001）资助.

摘　　要：文中收集了全球太古宙TTG和后太古宙埃达克岩的数据，研究对比表明，太古宙TTG不同于埃达克岩，早先学术界认为太古宙TTG相当于现代的埃达克岩，是一个错误的见解，是一个伪命题。TTG术语最早出现时并没有类似于埃达克岩的见解，后来发现了埃达克岩才引出二者类似的认识。为什么会出现这种见解？推测有两种可能：1）早先的研究均来自抽样的研究，即从典型到一般的推理方法。但是，抽样研究可能没有代表性。2）TTG平均值的误导，TTG的Sr的平均值的确〉400×10-，相当于埃达克岩，但是，通过分析TTG全球数据表明，TTG中的Sr含量变化很大，与埃达克岩没有关系。TTG主要出现在太古宙，后太古宙很少；TTG是太古宙岩石地壳的主体；而埃达克岩主要出现在后太古宙，是火山岩中很少的类型。这表明，TTG和埃达克岩分别处于不同的构造体制。太古宙异常的热，可能还没有板块构造。太古宙的岩浆岩（包括TTG）即使与后太古宙某些岩浆岩具有类似的地球化学特征，可能也不能照搬现代板块构造的解释。The data of the global Archean TTG and post-Archaean adakites are collected in this paper. The comparative study shows that Archean TTG is different from adakite, and earlier academics believed that Archean TTG is equivalent to modern adakite, and is a the wrong opinion, is a false proposition. The earliest TTG terminology did not appear to be similar to that of adakite, and later it was discovered that adakite had drawn similar understandings. Why do you see this kind of insight？ Presumably there are two possibilities： l） Earlier studies all came from sampled studies, that is, from typical to general reasoning. It seems that sampling studies may not be representative. 2） The average value of TTG is misleading, and the average value of Sr in TTG is indeed 〉400~ 10-6, which is equivalent to adakite. However, if we look closely at the TTG global data, we find that the Sr content in TTG varies greatly and has no relationship with adakite. TTG mainly occurs in the Archean period, and there is a little in the post-Archean period; TTG is the main body of Archean granites; and adakite mainly occurs in the post-Archean and is a rare type in volcanic rock. It shows that TTG and adakite are in different tectonic system. The anomalous heat of the Archean means that there may not be plate tectonics yet. The Archean magmatic rocks （including TTG） may not be able to replicate the interpretation of modern plate tectonics, even if they have similar geochemical charactcristies to certain magmatic rocks in the post-Archean period.

关 键 词：TTG 埃达克岩 对比 大数据 太古宙 后太古宙 

分 类 号：P586[天文地球—岩石学] P588.1[天文地球—地质学]