International Journal of Earth Sciences

, Volume 108, Issue 6, pp 2057–2069 | Cite as

Crystallographic preferred orientations of plagioclase via grain boundary sliding in a lower-crustal anorthositic ultramylonite

  • Yusuke SodaEmail author
  • Yumiko Harigane
  • Keisuke Kajimoto
  • Takamoto Okudaira
Original Paper


To clarify the rheological properties and deformational mechanisms that operate within lower-crustal shear zones, we analyzed deformation microstructures and fabrics in plagioclase grains from high-strain regions of intrafolial drag folds of an anorthositic ultramylonite from Langøya, Vesterålen, northern Norway. These grains have developed weak crystallographic preferred orientations (CPOs). Other than deformation twinning, they do not show any indications of intracrystalline plasticity or dynamic recrystallization. In some domains of the drag fold, plagioclase CPOs are more distinct, but the majority of inferred slip systems are not consistent with the main slip systems in plagioclase. These suggest that neither dislocation creep nor dislocation-accommodated grain boundary sliding (GBS) produced the plagioclase CPOs but rather grain rotation via GBS along specific grain boundaries parallel or subparallel to crystallographic planes of (010), (100) or (110), which led to an alignment of the easy-slip grain boundaries in the flow direction that produced the observed CPO patterns. The anisotropy of dissolution and growth rates may have been responsible for the development of the specific grain boundaries.


Plagioclase Anorthositic mylonite Lower crust Crystallographic preferred orientation Grain boundary sliding 



We thank N. Shigematsu for granting us permission to use the SEM–EBSD at the Geological Survey of Japan, AIST, and K. Ishii, J. Gómez Barreiro, and J. Fukuda for fruitful discussions. Nearly all the MTEX scripts used in this study were originally written by D. Mainprice. This paper benefited from detailed reviews by two anonymous referees. S. Mukherjee is thanked for his editorial handling of the manuscript. This study was supported in part by MEXT KAKENHI Grant Numbers 26109004, 16K05613, and 18H01297.


  1. Austin NJ, Evans B (2007) Paleowattmeters: a scaling relation for dynamically recrystallized grain size. Geology 35:343–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Azuma S, Katayama I, Nakakuki T (2014) Rheological decoupling at the Moho and implication to Venusian tectonics. Sci Rep 4:4403. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beeré W (1978) Stresses and deformation at grain boundaries. Phil Trans Roy Soc Lond A 288:177–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bons PD, den Brok B (2000) Crystallographic preferred orientation development by dissolution–precipitation creep. J Struct Geol 22:1713–1722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bunge H (1982) Texture analysis in materials science: mathematical models. Butterworths, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Bürgmann R, Dresen G (2008) Rheology of the lower crust and upper mantle: evidence from rock mechanics, geodesy, and field observations. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci 36:531–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Corfu F (2004) U-Pb geochronology of the Leknes Group: an exotic early-Caledonian metasedimentary assemblage stranded on Lofoten basement, northern Norway. J Geol Soc Lond 161:619–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Deer WA, Howie RA, Zussman J (1992) An introduction to the rock-forming minerals, 2nd edn. Addison Wesley Longman Limited, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Dresen G, Wang Z, Bai Q (1996) Kinetics of grain growth in anorthite. Tectonophysics 258:251–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gómez Barreiro J, Martínez Catalán JR (2012) The Bazar shear zone (NW Spain): microstructural and time-of-flight neutron diffraction analysis. J Virtual Explorer 41:5. Google Scholar
  11. Gómez Barreiro J, Lonardelli I, Wenk HR, Dresen G, Rybacki E, Ren Y, Tomé CN (2007) Preferred orientation of anorthite deformed by experimentally in Newtonian creep. Earth Planet Sci Lett 264:188–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Griffin WL, Tayor PN, Hakkinen JW, Heier KS, Iden IK, Krogh EJ, Malm O, Olsen KI, Ormaasen DE, Tveten E (1978) Archean and Proterozoic crustal evolution in Lofoten–Vesterålen, N Norway. J Geol Soc Lond 135:629–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Heidelbach F, Post A, Tullis J (2000) Crystallographic preferred orientation in albite samples deformed experimentally by dislocation and solution precipitation creep. J Struct Geol 22:1649–1661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heilbronner R, Tullis J (2000) The effect of static annealing on microstructures and crystallographic preferred orientations of quartzites experimentally deformed in axial compression. In: de Meer S, Drury MR, de Bresser JHP, Pennock GM (eds) Deformation mechanisms, rheology and tectonics: current status and future perspectives. Geological Society of London special publication No. 200. The Geological Society, London, pp 191–218Google Scholar
  15. Hongn FD, Hippertt JF (2001) Quartz crystallographic and morphologic fabric during folding/transposition in mylonites. J Struct Geol 23:81–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Karato SI (2008) Deformation of earth materials. Cambridge Univ Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Klein AC, Steltenpohl MG, Hames WG, Andresen A (1999) Ductile and brittle extension in the southern Lofoten archipelago, north Norway: implications for differences in tectonic style along ancient collisional margin. Am J Sci 299:69–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kruse R, Stünitz H, Kunze K (2001) Dynamic recrystallization processes in plagioclase porphyroclasts. Tectonophysics 23:1781–1802Google Scholar
  19. Lagoeiro L, Hippertt J, Lana C (2003) Deformation partitioning during folding and transposition of quartz layers. Tectonophysics 361:171–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Leib SE, Moecher DP, Steltenpohl MG, Andersen A (2016) Thermobarometry of metamorphosed pseudotachylyte and associated mylonite: constraints on dynamic co-seismic rupture depth attending Caledonian extension, north Norway. Tectonophysics 682:85–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lister GS, Hobbs BE (1980) The simulation of fabric development during plastic deformation and its application to quartzite: the influence of deformation history. J Struct Geol 2:355–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Løseth H, Tveten E (1996) Post-Caledonian structural evolution of the Lofoten and Vesterålen offshore and onshore areas. Norsk Geol Tidsskrift 76:215–230Google Scholar
  23. Mainprice D, Silver PG (1993) Interpretation of SKS-waves using samples from the subcontinental lithosphere. Phys Earth Planet Inter 78:257–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mainprice D, Bachmann F, Hielscher R, Schaeben H (2014) Descriptive tools for the analysis of texture projects with large datasets using MTEX: strength, symmetry and components. In: Faulkner DR, Mariani E, Mecklenburgh J (eds) Rock deformation from field, experiments, and theory: a volume in honour of Ernie Rutter. Geological Society of London special publication No. 409. The Geological Society, London. Google Scholar
  25. Markl G (1998) The Eidsfjord anorthosite, Vesterålen, Norway: field observations and geochemical data. Norges Geol Undersøkelse Bull 434:53–75Google Scholar
  26. Maruyama G, Hiraga T (2017) Grain- to multiple-grain-scale deformation processes during diffusion creep of forsterite + diopside aggregate: 2. Grain boundary sliding-induced grain rotation and its role in crystallographic preferred orientation in rocks. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 122:5916–5934CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Miranda EA, Hirth G, John BE (2016) Microstructural evidence for the transition from dislocation creep to dislocation-accommodated grain boundary sliding in naturally deformed plagioclase. J Struct Geol 92:30–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Miyazaki T, Sueyoshi K, Hiraga T (2013) Olivine crystals align during diffusion creep of Earth’s upper mantle. Nature 502:321–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Moecher DP, Steltenpohl MG (2011) Petrological evidence for co-seismic slip in extending middle-lower continental crust: Heier’s zone of pseudotachylyte, north Norway. In: Fagereng Å, Toy V, Rowland JV (eds) Geology of the earthquake source: a volume in honour of Rick Sibson. Geological Society of London special publication No. 359. The Geological Society, London, pp 169–186Google Scholar
  30. Mukherjee S, Punekar JN, Mahadani T, Mukherjee P (2015) Intrafolial folds: review and examples from the western Indian Higher Himalaya. In: Mulchrone KF (ed) Ductile shear zones: from micro- to macro-scales. Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken, pp 182–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Okudaira T, Shigematsu N, Harigane Y, Yoshida K (2017) Grain size reduction due to fracturing and subsequent grain-size-sensitive creep in a lower crustal shear zone in the presence of a CO2-bearing fluid. J Struct Geol 95:171–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Passchier CW, Trouw RAJ (2005) Microtectonics, 2nd edn. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  33. Pfiffner OA, Ramsay JG (1982) Constraints on geological strain rates: arguments from finite strain states of naturally deformed rocks. J Geophys Res 87:311–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Platt JP, Behr WM (2011) Grainsize evolution in ductile shear zones: implications for strain localization and the strength of the lithosphere. J Struct Geol 33:537–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Plattner U, Markl G, Sherlock S (2003) Chemical heterogeneities of Caledonian (?) pseudotachylytes in the Eidsfjord Anorthosite, north Norway. Contrib Mineral Petrol 145:316–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Poirier JP (1985) Creep of crystals. Cambridge Univ Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ramsay JG, Casey M, Kligfield R (1983) Role of shear in development of the Helvetic fold-thrust belt of Switzerland. Geology 11:439–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rybacki E, Dresen G (2000) Dislocation and diffusion creep of synthetic anorthosite aggregates. J Geophys Res 105:26017–26036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rybacki E, Dresen G (2004) Deformation mechanism maps for feldspar rocks. Tectonophysics 382:173–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Satsukawa T, Ildefonse B, Mainprice D, Morales LFG, Michibayashi K, Barou F (2013) A database of plagioclase crystal preferred orientations (CPO) and microstructures–implications for CPO origin, strength, symmetry and seismic anisotropy in gabbroic rocks. Solid Earth 4:511–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Skemer P, Katayama I, Jiang Z, Karato S (2005) The misorientation index: development of a new method for calculating the strength of lattice-preferred orientation. Tectonophysics 411:157–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Skjernaa L (1980) Rotation and deformation of randomly oriented planar and linear structures in progressive simple shear. J Struct Geol 2:101–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Soda Y, Okudaira T (2018) Microstructural evidence for the deep pulverization in a lower crustal meta-anorthosite. Terra Nova 30:399–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Steltenpohl MG, Hames WE, Andresen A (2004) The Silurian to Permian history of a metamorphic core complex in Lofoten, northern Scandinavian Caledonides. Tectonics 23:1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Steltenpohl MG, Moecher D, Andresen A, Ball J, Mager S, Hames WE (2011) The Eidsfjord shear zone, Lofoten–Vesterålen, north Norway: an early Devonian, paleoseismogenic low-angle normal fault. J Struct Geol 33:1023–1043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stünitz H (1991) Folding and shear deformation in quartzites, inferred from crystallographic preferred orientation and shape fabrics. J Struct Geol 13:71–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stünitz H, Fitz Gerald JD, Tullis J (2003) Dislocation generation, slip systems, and dynamic recrystallization in experimentally deformed plagioclase single crystals. Tectonophysics 372:215–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Svahnberg H, Piazolo S (2010) The initiation of strain localisation in plagioclase-rich rocks: insights from detailed microstructural analyses. J Struct Geol 32:1404–1416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tullis J, Yund RA (1987) Transition from cataclastic flow to dislocation creep of feldspar: mechanisms and microstructures. Geology 15:606–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Twiss RJ (1977) Theory and applicability of a recrystallized grainsize paleopiezometer. Pure Appl Geophys 115:27–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Williams PF, Jiang D, Lin S (2006) Interpretation of deformation fabrics of infrastructure zone rocks in the context of channel flow and other tectonic models. In: Law RD, Searle MP, Godin L (eds) Channel flow, ductile extrusion and exhumation in continental collision zones. Geological Society of London special publication No. 268. The Geological Society, London, pp 221–235Google Scholar
  52. Wright SI, Nowell MM, Field DP (2011) A review of strain analysis using electron backscatter diffraction. Microsc Microanal 17:316–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Geologische Vereinigung e.V. (GV) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of GeosciencesOsaka City UniversityOsakaJapan
  2. 2.Institute of Geology and GeoinformationGeological Survey of Japan, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and TechnologyTsukubaJapan

Personalised recommendations