Mössbauer studies on impactites from Lonar impact crater
- 633 Downloads
Iron mineralogy has been studied using Mössbauer spectroscopy on eight glassy impactite samples from different parts of the Lonar Crater Rim Region. Distinct changes are observed when compared to the host basaltic samples. Significant amount of Fe3 + phase is observed in the impactite samples whereas this phase is known to be almost absent in the basalt. Besides this we have a strong Fe2 + doublet showing up corresponding to the main iron-containing mineral. The Mössbauer results are very similar to those with glasses from Ries crater which is also believed to have formed by meteoritic impact but on nonbasaltic rock bed. Besides the glassy samples, we also study some spherules found in the crater region and some fine glassy particles on the surfaces of melt impact bombs. These contain a good amount of magnetically ordered phase, most likely nanosize hematite. Interestingly, part of it is strongly attracted by a magnet and part of it is not. But both parts show a significantly strong six-line component corresponding to hematite.
KeywordsMössbauer studies Impactites Lonar impact crater
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Fredriksson, K., Noonan, A., Nelen, J.: Meteoritic, lunar and lonar impact chondrules. Earth Moon Planets 7, 475–482 (1973)Google Scholar
- 4.Sengupta, D., Bhandari, N., Watanabe, S.: Formation age of lonar meteor Crater, India. Revista Aplicada Instrumentacao 12, 1–7 (1997)Google Scholar
- 11.Thakker, C.D., Ranade, D.R.: An alkalophilic Methanosarcina isolated from Lonar crater. Curr. Sci. 82, 455–458 (2002)Google Scholar
- 12.Pohl, J., Stöffler, D., Gall, H., Ernstson, K.: The Ries impact crater. In: Roddy, D.J., Pepin, R.O., Merrill, R.B. (eds.) Impact and Explosion Cratering, pp. 343–404. Pergamon, New York (1977)Google Scholar
- 13.Bhandari, N., Verma, H.C., Upadhyay, C., Tripathi, A., Tripathi, R.P.: Global occurrence of magnetic and super paramagnetic iron phases in Cretaceous Tertiary boundary clays. Geological Soc. Am. Spec. Pap. 356, 201–211 (2002)Google Scholar