AMS in Granites and Lava Flows: Two End Members of a Continuum?

  • Edgardo Cañón-Tapia
Part of the IAGA Special Sopron Book Series book series (IAGA, volume 1)


Significant differences between granites and lava flows can require different basic assumptions when interpreting AMS results. Among the differences between both types of rocks, perhaps the earliest in being recognized was the wider range of mineral compositions found in granites. Such difference can result in complex mineral assemblages that, in turn, can complicate the interpretation of AMS results in granites relative to the AMS measured in lava flows. Closely linked to this mineralogic effect is the distinction between “primary” flow fabrics and “secondary” effects. Such distinction is a matter of concern in most granites whereas the AMS of lava flows is usually considered “primary” without further examination. As the increasing evidence obtained from lava flows shows, however, the AMS of lavas is not as simple as the general model of hydrodynamic alignment of particles would suggest and much can be learned from lava flows that can be applied directly to the interpretation of AMS in granites. In this work, the better understanding of the fabric of lava flows that has been obtained in recent years is used as the basis for a reassessment of the basic assumptions needed for the correct interpretation of AMS in both lava flows and granitic rocks.


Rock Type Lava Flow Igneous Rock Magnetic Anisotropy Mineral Fabric 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The comments made by two anonymous reviewers helped to clarify many of the ideas presented in the text are greatly appreciated. I also express my thanks to E. Herrero-Bervera for the encouragement that led me to give a more formal expression to some of the ideas presented here and that had been informally discussed several times.


  1. Ade-Hall J, Palmer HC, Hubbard TP (1971) The magnetic and opaque petrological response of basalts to regional hydrothermal alteration. Geophys J Roy Astronomical Soc 24:137–174Google Scholar
  2. Ade-Hall J, Khan MA, Dagley P, Wilson RL (1968a) A detailed opaque petrological and magnetic investigation of a single Tertiary lava flow from Skye, Scotland – I Iron-titanium oxide petrology. Geophys J R Astron Soc 16:375–388Google Scholar
  3. Ade-Hall J, Khan MA, Dagley P, Wilson RL (1968b) A detailed opaque petrological and magnetic investigation of a single Tertiary lava flow from Skye, Scotland – II Spatial variations of magnetic properties and selected relationships between magnetic and opaque petrological properties. Geophys J R Astron Soc 16:389–399Google Scholar
  4. Ade-Hall J, Khan MA, Dagley P, Wilson RL (1968c) A detailed opaque petrological and magnetic investigation of a single Tertiary lava flow from Skye, Scotland – III Investigations into the possibility of obtaning the intensity of the ambient magnetic field (Fanc) at the time of the cooling of the flow. Geophys J Roy Astronomical Soc 16:401–415Google Scholar
  5. Arbaret L, Diot H, Bouchez JL (1996), Shape fabrics of particles in low concentration suspensions: 2D analogue experiments and applications to tiling in magma. J Struct Geol 18:941–950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Arbaret L, Diot H, Bouchez JL, Lespinasse P, de Saint-Blanquat, M. (1997) Analogue 3D simple-shear experiments of magmatic biotite subfabrics. In: Bouchez JL, Hutton DHW, Stephens WE (eds) Granite: from segregation of melt to emplacement fabrics. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 129–143Google Scholar
  7. Archanjo CJ (1993) Fabriques de plutons granitiques et déformation crustale du Nord-Est du Brésil: une étude par l’anisotropie de la susceptibilité magnétique de granites ferromagnétiques. Thesis University, Paul-Sabatier, Toulouse 167 ppGoogle Scholar
  8. Archanjo CJ, Launeau P, Bouchez JL (1995) Magnetic fabric vs. magnetite and biotite shape fabrics of the magnetite-bearing granite pluton of Gameleiras (northeast Brazil) Phys Earth Planetary Inter 89:63–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Aydin A, Ferré EC, Aslan Z (2007) The magnetic susceptibility of granitic rocks as a proxy for geochemical differentiation: example from the Saruhan granitoids, NE Turkey. Tectonophysics 441:85–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Benn, K. 1994. Overprinting of magnetic fabrics in granites by small strains: numerical modeling. Tectonophysics 233:153–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Best MG (1982) Igneous and metamorphic petrology. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York, NY, 630 ppGoogle Scholar
  12. Borradaile GJ, Gauthier D (2003) Interpreting anomalous magnetic fabrics in ophiolite dikes. J Struct Geol 25:171–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bouchez JL (1997) Granite is never isotropic: an introduction to AMS studies of granitic rocks. In: Bouchez JL, Hutton DHW, Stephens WE (eds) Granite: from segregation of melt to emplacement fabrics. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 95–112Google Scholar
  14. Cañón-Tapia E (1994) AMS parameters: guidelines for their rational selection. Pure Appl Geophys 142:365–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cañón-Tapia E (1996) Single-grain versus distribution anisotropy: a simple three-dimensional model. Phys Earth Planetary Inter 94:149–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cañón-Tapia E (2001) Factors affecting the relative importance of shape and distribution anisotropy in rocks: theory and experiments. Tectonophysics 340:117–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cañón-Tapia E (2004a) Anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility of lava flows and dykes: an historical account. In: Martín-Hernández F, Lüneburg C, Aubourg MC, Jackson M (eds) Magnetic fabric. Methods and applications. Geological Society, London, pp 205–225Google Scholar
  18. Cañón-Tapia E (2004b). Flow direction and magnetic mineralogy of lava flows from the central parts of the Peninsula of Baja California, Mexico. Bull Volcanol 66:431–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cañón-Tapia E (2005) Uses of anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility in the study of emplacement processes of lava flows. In: Manga M, Ventura G (eds), Kinematics and dynamics of lava flows. Geological Society of America, Boulder, Colorado, USA, pp 29–46Google Scholar
  20. Cañón-Tapia E (2007) Susceptibility, parameters, anisotropy. In: Gubbins D, Herrero-Bervera E (eds), Encyclopedia of Geomagnetism and Paleomagnetism. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 937–939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cañón-Tapia E, Castro J (2004) AMS measurements on obsidian from the Inyo Domes, CA: a comparison of magnetic and mineral preferred orientation fabrics. J Volcanol Geothermal Res 134:169–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cañón-Tapia E, Chávez-Álvarez MJ (2004a) Theoretical aspects of particle movement in flowing magma: implication for the anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility of dykes. In: Martín-Hernández F, Lüneburg C, Aubourg MC, Jackson M (eds), Magnetic fabric. Methods and applications. Geological Society, London, pp 227–249Google Scholar
  23. Cañón-Tapia E, Chávez-Álvarez MJ (2004b) Rotation of uniaxial ellipsoidal particles during simple shear revisited: the influence of elongation ratio, initial distribution of a multiparticle system and amount of shear in the acquisition of a stable orientation. J Struct Geol 26:2 073–2 087Google Scholar
  24. Cañón-Tapia E, Coe R (2002) Rock magnetic evidence of inflation of a flood basalt lava flow. Bull Volcanol 64:289–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cañón-Tapia E, Herrero-Bervera E (2009), Sampling strategies and the anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility of dykes. Tectonophysics 466:3–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Cañón-Tapia E, Pinkerton H (2000) The anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility of lava flows: an experimental approach. J Volcanol Geothermal Res 98:219–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Cañón-Tapia E, Walker GPL, Herrero-Bervera E (1995) Magnetic fabric and flow direction in basaltic pahoehoe lava of Xitle volcano, Mexico. J Volcanol Geothermal Res 65:249–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Cañón-Tapia E, Walker GPL, Herrero-Bervera E (1996) The internal structure of lava flows – insights from AMS measurements I: near vent aa. J Volcanol Geothermal Res 70:21–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Cañón-Tapia E, Walker GPL, Herrero-Bervera E (1997) The internal structure of lava flows – insights from AMS measurements II: Hawaiian pahoehoe, toothpaste lava and ‘a’a. J Volcanol Geothermal Res 76:19–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Chlupácová M, Hrouda F, Janák F, Rejl L (1975) The fabric, genesis and relative age relations of the granitic rocks of the Cistá-Jesenice Massif (Czechoslovakia) as indicated by magnetic anisotropy. Gerl Beitr Geophys 84:487–500Google Scholar
  31. Cashman KV, Thornber, C, Kauahikaua JP (1999) Cooling and crystallization of lava in open channels, and the transition of Pahoehoe Lava to ‘a’a. Bull Volcanol 61:306, 323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Dragoni M, Lanza, R, Tallarico A (1997) Magnetic anisotropy produced by magma flow: theoretical model and experimental data from Ferrar dolerite sills (Antarctica) Geophys J Int 128:230–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Dortman NB (1984). Physical properties of rocks and mineral deposits. Nedra, Moscow, 455 pp. (in Russian)Google Scholar
  34. Ellwood BB, Hrouda F, Wagner JJ (1988) Symposia on magnetic fabrics: introductory comments. Phys Earth Planetary Inter 51:249–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ferré EC, Martín-Hernández F, Teyssier, C, Jackson M (2004) Paramagnetic and ferromagnetic anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility in migmatites: measurements in high and low fields and kinematic implications. Geophys J Int 157:1119–1129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Fernandez A (1987) Preferred orientation developed by rigid markers in two-dimensional simple shear strain: a theoretical and experimental study. Tectonophysics 136:151–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Fernandez A, Feybesse JL, Mezure JF (1983) Theoretical and experimental study of fabrics developed by different shaped markers in two-dimensional simple shear. Bull de la Soc geol de France 25:319–326Google Scholar
  38. Freeman B (1985) The motion of rigid ellipsoidal particles in slow flows. Tectonophysics 113:163–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Gay NC (1966) Orientation of mineral lineation along the flow direction in rocks: a discussion. Tectonophysics 3:559–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Gay NC (1968) The motion of rigid particles embedded in a viscous fluid during pure shear deformation of the fluid. Tectonophysics 5:81–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Gleizes G, Nédélec A, Bouchez JL, Autran, A, Rochette P (1993) Magnetic susceptibility of the Mount-Louis Andorra ilmenite-type granite (Pyrenees): a new tool for the petrographic characterization and regional mapping of zoned granite plutons. J Geophys Res 98:4317–4331Google Scholar
  42. Grégoire V, de Saint-Blanquat M, Nédélec A, Bouchez JL (1995) Shape anisotropy versus magnetic interactions of magnetite grains: experiments and application to AMS in granitic rocks. Geophys Res Lett 20:2765–2768Google Scholar
  43. Hargraves RB, Johnson D, Chan CY (1991) Distribution anisotropy: The cause of AMS in igneous rocks? Geophys Res Lett 18:2193–2196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hinch EJ, Leal LG (1979) Rotation of small non-axisymmetric particles in a simple shear flow. J Fluid Mech 92:591–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hon K, Kauahikaua J, Denlinger, R, Mackay K (1994) Emplacement and inflation of pahoehoe sheet flows: observations and measurements of active lava flows on Kilauea Volcano, Hawaii. Bull Geol Soc Am 106:351–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hrouda F (1982) Magnetic anisotropy of rocks and its application in geology and geophysics. Geophysical Survey 5:37–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hrouda, F, Lanza R (1989) Magnetic fabric in the Biella and Traversella stocks (Periadriatic Line): Implications for the mode of emplacement. Phys Earth Planet Interiors 56:337–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hrouda F, Chlupacova M, Rejl L (1971) The mimetic fabric of magnetite in some foliated granodiorites, as indicated by magnetic anisotropy. Earth Planet Sci Lett 11:381–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hrouda F, Chlupacova M, Schulmann K, Smid J, Zavada P (2005) On the effect of lava viscosity on the magnetic fabric intensity in alkaline volcanic rocks. Studia Geophys Geod 49:191–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Hrouda F, Melka R, Schulmann K (1994) Periodical changes in fabric intensity during simple shear deformation and its implications for magnetic susceptibility anisotropy of sedimentary and volcanic rocks. Acta Univ Carol 38:37–56Google Scholar
  51. Hrouda F, Putis M, Madarás J (2002) The Alpine overprints of the magnetic fabrics in the basement and cover rocks of the Veporic Unit (western Carpathians, Slovakia) Tectonophysics 359:271–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Hrouda F, Táborská S, Schulmann K, Jezek J. Dolejs D (1999) Magnetic fabric and rheology of co-mingled magmas in the Nasavrky plutonic complex (E Bohemia): implications for intrusive strain regime and emplacement mechanism. Tectonophysics 307:93–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Iezzi, G, Ventura G (2002) Crystal fabric evolution in lava flows: results from numerical simulations. Earth Planetary Sci Lett 200:33–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ildefonse B, Arbaret, L, Diot H (1997) Rigid particles in simple shear flow: is their preferred orientation periodic or steady-state? In: Bouchez JL, Hutton DHW, Stephens WE (eds) Granite: from segregation of melt to emplacement fabrics. Petrology and structural geology. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 177–185Google Scholar
  55. Ildefonse B, Launeau P, Bouchez JL, Fernandez A (1992) Effect of mechanical ointeractions on the development of shape preferred orientations: a two-dimensional experimental approach. J Struct Geol 14:73–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ishihara S (1977) The magnetite-series and ilmenite-series granitic rocks. Mining Geol 27:293–305Google Scholar
  57. Jeffery GB (1922) The motion of ellipsoidal particles immersed in a viscous fluid. Proc R Soc London 102:161–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Jezek J (1994) Software for modelling the motion of rigid triaxial ellipsoidal particles in viscous flow. Comput Geosci 20:409–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Jezek J, Melka R, Schulmann K, Venera Z (1994) The behaviour of rigid triaxial ellipsoidal particles in viscous flows – modeling of fabric evolution in a multiparticle system. Tectonophysics 229:165–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Jezek J, Schulmann K, Segeth K (1996) Fabric evolution of rigid inclusions during mixed coaxial and simple shear flows. Tectonophysics 257:203–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Manga M (1998) Orientation distribution of microlites in obsidian. J Volcanol Geothermal Res 86:107–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Méndez-García CH (2005) Mecanismo de emplazamiento del plutón El Testerazo, Baja California, deducido a través de mediciones de ASM. MSc thesis, CICESE, Ensenada, 94 ppGoogle Scholar
  63. Olivier P, de Saint-Blanquat M, Gleizes G, Leblanc D (1997) Homogeneity of granite fabrics at the metre and dekametre scales. In: Bouchez JL, Hutton DHW, Stephens WE (eds) Granite: from segregation of melt to emplacement fabrics. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 113–127Google Scholar
  64. Owens WH (1974) Mathematical model studies on factors affecting the magnetic anisotropy of deformed rocks. Tectonophysics 24:115–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Paterson SR, Fowler TK, Schmidt KL, Yoshinobu AS, Yuan ES, Miller RB (1998) Interpreting magmatic fabric patterns in plutons. Lithos 44:53–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Petford N (2003) Rheology of granitic magmas during ascent and emplacement. Ann Rev Earth Planet Sci 31:399–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Polacci M, Cashman KV, Kauahikaua JP (1999) Textural characterization of the pahoehoe – ‘a’a transition in Hawaiian basalt. Bull Volcanol 60:595–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Pueyo EL, Román-Berdiel MT, Bouchez JL, Casas AM, Larrasoaña JC (2004) Statistical significance of magnetic fabric data in studies of paramagnetic granites. In: Martín-Hernández F, Lüneburg C, Aubourg MC, Jackson M (eds), Magnetic fabric: methods and applications. The Geological Society, London, pp 395–420Google Scholar
  69. Raposo MIB, Berquó TS (2008) Tectonic fabric revealed by AARM of the proterozoic mafic dyke swarm in the Salvador City (Bahia State); São Francisco Craton, NE Brazil. Phys Earth Planetary Inter Syst 167:179–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Raposo MIB, Chaves AO, Lojkasek-Lima P, DÁgrella-Filho MS, Teixeira W (2004) Magnetic fabrics and rock magnetism of Proterozoic dike swarm from the southern São Francisco Craton, Minas Gerais state, Brazil. Tectonophysics 378:43–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Rochette P, Aubourg C, Perrin M (1999) Is this fabric normal? A review and case studies in volcanic formations. Tectonophysics 307:219–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Rochette P, Jackson M, Aubourg C (1991) Rock magnetism and the interpretation of anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility. Rev Geophys 30:209–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Rochette P, Scaillet B, Guillot S, Pêcher A, Le Fort P (1994) Magnetic mineralogy of the High Himalayan leucogranites: structural implications. Earth Planetary Sci Lett 126; 217–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Román-Berdiel T, Aranguren A, Cuevas J, Tubía JM (1998) Compressional granite-emplacement model: structural magnetic study of the Trives Massif (NW Spain). Lithos 44; 37–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Stephenson A (1994) Distribution anisotropy: two simple models for magnetic lineation and foliation. Phys Earth Planetary Inter 82:49–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Táborská S, Breiter K (1998) Magnetic anisotropy of an extremely fractionated granite: the Podlesí Stock, Krusné hory Mts., Czech Republic. Acta Univ Carolinae Geol 42:147–149Google Scholar
  77. Tarling D, Hrouda F (1993) The magnetic anisotropy of rocks. Chapman and Hall, London, 217 ppGoogle Scholar
  78. Trindade RIF, Raposo MIB, Rnesto M, Siqueira R (1999) Magnetic susceptibility and partial anhysteretic remanence anisotropies in the magnetite-bearing granite pluton of Tourão, NE Brazil. Tectonophysics 314:443–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Zák J, Schulmann K, Hrouda F (2005) Multiple magmatic fabrics in the Sázava pluton (Bohemian Massif, Czech Republic): a result of superposition of wrench-dominated regional transpression on final emplacement. J Struct Geol 27:805–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento de GeologíaCICESEEnsenadaMexico
  2. 2.Geology DepartmentCICESESan DiegoUSA

Personalised recommendations