Geological Society of America Special Paper 307 1996

Mega-impact melt petrology (Chicxulub, Sudbury, and the Moon): Effects of scale and other factors on potential for fractional crystallization and development of cumulates

Paul H. Warren Institute of Geophysics, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90095-1567; and Mineralogical Institute, Graduate School of Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113, Japan Philippe Claeys* Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720 Esteban Cedillo-Pardo Instituto Mexicano del Petróleo, Eje Central Lazaro Cardenas 152, 07739 Mexico DF, Mexico

ABSTRACT Compared to the granophyre that forms the upper one-third of the Sudbury Igne- ous Complex, available melt products from the Chicxulub Basin are consistently more fine grained, and their compositions are more andesitic (less differentiated from bulk continental crust). Available lunar impact melt products are also fine grained and lit- tle differentiated among themselves. The origin of the Sudbury Igneous Complex is controversial, but assuming it formed mainly as impact melt, the size of the Complex and the extent of vertical layering within it were probably strongly influenced by the high melting/displacement ratio engendered because the impact occurred in a region previously warmed by the Penokean Orogeny. Potential for impact melt to undergo fractional crystallization is probably correlated with size of the impact structure, but the most important variable, the melting/displacement (m/d) ratio, is not a simple function of structure diameter. Planetary g and preimpact T of the melting zone both strongly influence m/d, which in turn influences (1) the proportion of suspended clas- tic debris in the melt, (2) the average T of these clasts (which in any event are much colder than, and thus act to chill, the melt), and (3) the proportion of the melt that is disseminated by ejection from the transient crater. The magnitude of these shifts can only be crudely calibrated, due to uncertainties regarding the shape of the melting zone, the size/shape of the ejection zone in relation to the transient crater, and the manner in which modification (collapse) of the transient crater mingles clastic debris with the impact melt. But clearly, (1) and (2) significantly increase, while (3) signifi- cantly decreases, as m/d varies from the low values (≤0.2) associated with simple craters to the extremely high values (0.45–0.6) associated with Chicxulub, Sudbury, and the largest lunar basins. In lunar impacts, differentiation of the impact melt is hampered by systematically lower m/d compared to terrestrial craters of similar size and by the comparatively high (solid crust like) density of typical impact melts. How- ever, in a few of the largest impacts, most of the unejected melt forms in the upper mantle, where it probably remains while crystallizing into a series of mafic cumulates essentially similar to the preimpact upper mantle. On the earliest Moon (the “magma

*Present address: Institut für Mineralogie, Museum für Naturkunde, Invalidenstrasse 43, D-10015 Berlin, Germany.

Warren, P. H., Claeys, P., and Cedillo-Pardo, E., 1996, Mega-impact melt petrology (Chicxulub, Sudbury, and the Moon): Effects of scale and other factors on potential for fractional crystallization and development of cumulates, in Ryder, G., Fastovsky, D., and Gartner, S., eds., The Cretaceous-Tertiary Event and Other Catastrophes in Earth History: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America Special Paper 307.

105 106 P. H. Warren and Others

ocean” era and the first few hundred million years thereafter) the background tem- perature of upper mantle was so hot that episodes of large-scale impact melting must have been practically indistinguishable from pulses of enhanced endogenous magma- tism. If the putative Procellarum basin formed with a transient crater diameter of ~1,450 km, most of the impact melt–derived rocks in the western nearside megarego- lith should be a distinctively mantle-rich (roughly 50%) variety formed and ejected in this one impact.

INTRODUCTION Wood, 1975) led to a general consensus that even large-scale impact melts undergo little differentiation. This conclusion was Interest in the Chicxulub (Yucatán) structure usually based primarily on (1) observations that terrestrial impact melt focuses on the catastrophic global-ecological effects associated products tend to be chemically homogeneous (Phinney and with formation of a Phanerozoic impact basin (Penfield and Simonds, 1977; Grieve and Floran, 1978) and (2) an inference Camargo Z., 1981; Swisher et al., 1992), but Chicxulub is also that thorough mixing with, and digestion of, cooler clastic inherently interesting as one of the two or three largest impact debris causes impact melts to cool too rapidly for significant structures on Earth. Sharpton et al. (1993) identify four rings, differentiation (Simonds et al., 1976; Onorato et al., 1978). the widest of which has diameter D ~ 300 km; suggesting that Also supporting this interpretation, the relatively few lunar the most prominent ring, with D ~ 170 km, is close to the rim of rocks with preserved coarse cumulate textures tend to be vastly the transient crater. In contrast, Hildebrand et al. (1995) advo- more compositionally diverse than fine-grained, siderophile- cate a structural D of ~170 km and a transient crater D of rich lunar rocks of obvious impact melt derivation (e.g., Warren ~90 km. For purposes of discussion, we will take the structural and Wasson, 1977; Norman, 1994b). Some skepticism persists “rim” diameter of the basin to be ~240 km, which conveniently (Delano and Ringwood, 1978), but for most of the past two coincides with the average of several recent estimates for the decades it has been widely assumed that even basin-scale Sudbury (Ontario) basin (Deutsch and Grieve, 1994; Spray and impact melts do not undergo significant igneous differentiation Thompson, 1995). The only possibly larger impact basin rec- (e.g., Simonds et al., 1976; Spudis and Ryder, 1981; Lindstrom ognizable on Earth is the deeply eroded Vredefort (South et al., 1990). Africa) structure, for which Therriault et al. (1993) estimate D Since the 1970s, much has been learned about the theory of was originally 190 to 300 km. It should be admitted that some impact processes (e.g., Melosh, 1989) and about the petrology skepticism persists toward the impact hypothesis for all three of lunar and terrestrial impact craters. Some of the most sig- of these structures (e.g., Meyerhoff et al., 1994). nificant new observations pertain to the Sudbury Igneous Com- One of the most important effects of a large impact is the plex (SIC), a sill-like body of grossly layered, medium- to sudden conversion of nearly all of the impactor’s kinetic energy coarse-grained, roughly noritic igneous rocks near the center of into heat, mostly in a roughly hemispherical region extending the Sudbury structure. The SIC is famous for the rich Ni-Cu sul- deep below the epicenter of the impact (Melosh, 1989). Vast vol- fide deposits associated with the “Sublayer” igneous rocks and umes of impact melt may be produced, and at least in principle Footwall Breccia that form its basal contact. The SIC was for- these melts may undergo fractional crystallization (i.e., form merly interpreted, even by geologists recognizing the impact cumulates) to produce a layered complex. Understanding the origin of the overall structure, as a product of mainly endogen- fate of melts generated by basin-scale impacts is crucial to inter- ous terrestrial heating, that is, essentially a “normal” layered pretation of early crustal genesis. The ancient lunar crust is intrusion, formed as an indirect consequence of the impact. scarred by numerous multiring impact basins: The compilation However, estimates of the structure’s size have recently of Wilhelms (1987) includes 17 definite basins (plus 14 “prob- increased (Deutsch and Grieve, 1994; Spray and Thompson, able and possible” ones) with apparent diameter ≥500 km. It has 1995) to the point at which the implied volume of impact melt is been suggested (e.g., Alfvén and Arrhenius, 1976; Wetherill, nearly 10 times the estimated (present-day, partly eroded) mass 1981) that impact melting was primarily responsible for differ- of the SIC (Grieve and Cintala, 1992). Also, isotopic evidence ε ε entiating the Moon’s large (64-km thick) crust and that many (such as highly positive Nd, highly negative Sr) suggests that highland rocks customarily interpreted as products of endogen- the bulk of the material of the SIC is of crustal, not mantle, ous lunar magmatism (e.g., Warren and Wasson, 1977) may derivation (Faggart et al., 1985; Naldrett et al., 1986; Deutsch et actually be impact melt products (Grieve et al., 1991). Distin- al., 1989; Walker et al, 1991). Thus, the SIC has recently been guishing between the roles of impact-generated magmatism ver- interpreted as a product of igneous differentiation (i.e., fractional sus endogenous, mantle-derived magmatism is one of the most crystallization) of a large mass of impact melt, with negligible fundamental problems of lunar science, with profound implica- addition of endogenously derived magma (Grieve et al., 1991; tions regarding thermal and geochemical evolution of the Moon Avermann et al., 1992). This interpretation is still very contro- and indirectly of its “sister planet” Earth. versial (e.g., Chai and Eckstrand, 1993; Norman, 1994b). A debate in the mid-1970s (e.g., Warner et al., 1974; Lunar samples with clear indications of impact melt origin Mega-impact melt petrology (Chicxulub, Sudbury, and the Moon) 107

(e.g., high siderophile concentrations) are common, and al- sion of two separate magmas. These magmas partly intermixed, though the vast majority have broadly noritic to anorthositic- but in both cases internally differentiated (formed cumulates) noritic bulk compositions, at several sites close to individual only to a very slight extent. large basins distinctive secondary compositional traits prevail, Textures of the noritic and gabbroic SIC rocks were inter- and such groups of samples are generally viewed as character- preted by Naldrett and coworkers (e.g., Naldrett and Hewins, istic of the individual nearby basins (e.g., Lindstrom et al., 1984) as indicative of cumulus origin. However, Naldrett and 1990; McKinley et al., 1984). The best-sampled lunar basin is Hewins (1984) did not specify any basis for this inference. The probably Serenitatis (structural D ~ 740 to 880 km), the margin term “hypidiomorphic granular,” applied by these authors to of which was sampled by Apollo 17; sample linkages with the most of the noritic and gabbroic rocks, is seldom associated Imbrium (~1160 km) and Nectaris (~860 km) basins are widely with cumulates. None of the examples of SIC “main mass” tex- invoked but not so firmly constrained (Wilhelms, 1987). Like tures shown by Naldrett and Hewins (1984) manifestly features the “melt sheets” of terrestrial craters smaller than Chicxulub a cumulus framework as required to meet Irvine’s (1982) care- and Sudbury (Phinney and Simonds, 1977), lunar impact melt- fully formulated definition of a cumulate (cf. Wadsworth, derived samples of apparent basin provenance tend to be rather 1985). Undoubted cumulus crystals (Wager and Brown, 1967) uniform in composition, but Grieve et al. (1991) and to a lesser are generally coarser than these examples (these show 1.5 mm degree Spudis (1992) have recently questioned the assumption maximum dimension and typically have aspect ratios of 3:1). that basin-scale lunar impact melts undergo no significant igne- Warren and Wasson (1977) stipulated grain size ≥3 mm in their ous differentiation. listing of possible indications that a lunar rock is of “pristine” In this chapter, we endeavor to apply constraints from non–impact melt origin. The “main mass” SIC textures shown modern cratering theory (e.g., Melosh, 1989; Chen et al., 1994) by Naldrett and Hewins (1984) would have been interpreted by in conjunction with petrologic observations, including some Warren and Wasson (1977) or Warren (1990) as probable new data for Chicxulub melt rocks, to assess effects of scale as impact melt products. well as other factors on potential for fractional crystallization The scarcity of perceptible clasts in most SIC layers (all and cumulate development by large-scale impact melts. except the uppermost granophyre—cf. the section “Interpreta- tion of impact ‘melt rock’ textures: Clast Darwinism”) does not PETROLOGIC COMPARISONS: SUDBURY, THE guarantee that these layers were once completely molten. In MOON, CHICXULUB addition to the trace element evidence of Chai and Eckstrand Sudbury (1993), Sr isotopic data can be interpreted to suggest that the SIC was never even grossly homogeneous (Naldrett et al., 1986; The Sudbury Igneous Complex features pronounced large- Deutsch et al., 1990). It should be admitted, however, that Gib- scale (vertical) compositional layering and is occasionally bins and McNutt (1975) found relatively little 87Sr/86Sr (initial) likened to classic layered intrusions of the Skaergaard-Stillwater diversity among SIC rocks, apart from a strong norite/ gra- variety. As reviewed by Naldrett and Hewins (1984), SIC rocks nophyre disparity, and suggested that Sr isotopes in the upper range from a mafic norite with pyroxenes that have Mg/(Mg part of the SIC were pervasively altered by metamorphism. Nal- ε + Fe) as high as 78 mol% to a thick capping granophyre, esti- drett et al. (1986) also reported a large spread in Nd, roughly mated (Collins, 1934) to make up ~63% of the total Complex and correlating with their Sr-initial diversity, but a set of possibly consisting of ~90% quartz + feldspar with only 10% mafic min- more precise Nd measurements by Faggart et al. (1985), unfor- erals, including pyroxenes with Mg/(Mg + Fe) as low as tunately without accompanying Sr measurements, indicates ε 25 mol%. The granophyre layer is enriched in K and incompati- rather uniform Nd. ble elements by a factor of ~2.8 and depleted in CaO by a factor Above the SIC, extending the full length and width of the of ~3.6, compared to the norite layer (Collins, 1934; Kuo and Sudbury Basin, is a complex layer of breccias known as the Crocket, 1979; Chai and Eckstrand, 1993). However, in several Onaping Formation, with an estimated thickness of 1.6 to respects the SIC is relatively undifferentiated. The SIC rocks are 1.8 km (Muir and Peredery, 1984; Avermann and Brockmeyer, comparatively fine grained (grains seldom more than 2 mm in 1992). Grieve et al. (1991) interpret the upper 60 to 70% of the longest dimension), they completely lack graded or fine-scale Onaping as a welded mass of back-fallen ejecta mixed with sub- igneous layering, and even contacts between the large-scale lay- ordinate, heterogeneously distributed impact melt, but they ers are strictly gradational (Naldrett and Hewins, 1984). An intru- interpret the lower 30 to 40% (i.e., the ~300-m-thick Basal sion emplaced in mainly a single stage, as impact melt probably Member and apparently the “melt body” parts of the Gray Mem- tends to be emplaced, cannot be expected to engender layering as ber) as part of the main Sudbury “melt sheet.” Avermann and complex as that found in typical episodically intruded igneous Brockmeyer (1992) likewise interpret the Basal Member (and complexes. Nonetheless, considering the stark compositional related “isolated bodies in the Gray and Black Members”) as the disparity between the norite and granophyre layers, Chai and “upper zone of the Sudbury impact melt system,” even though Eckstrand (1993) infer from remarkably uniform trace element they describe the lower half of the Basal Member as crystalline contents within each of these layers that the SIC formed by intru- melt breccia consisting of “~80–90%” clasts. 108 P. H. Warren and Others

Chicxulub 1 mm) in C1/N10 by Schuraytz et al. (1994). We retain this term for C1/N9 grains coarser than twice the prevalent 0.3 mm We have studied seven thin sections of impact melt–derived size, including three of the most diopside-rich pyroxenes ana- rocks from Chicxulub: one from core C1, position N9, near the lyzed (Fig. 2b). However, in C1/N9 the-grain size distribution geographical center of the structure and a short distance (≤4m) (apart from the matrix/clast contrast) is not markedly bimodal, above the C1/N10 sample of Sharpton et al. (1992) and Schu- and we suspect the coarser grains are strongly altered relicts raytz et al. (1994); and three each from positions N17 and N19 of from a suite of disintegrated target rocks. core Y6, the same (to within a few m) as the original positions of C1/N9 and C1/N10 are the coarsest Chicxulub impact melt samples described previously by Hildebrand et al. (1991), Kring products yet sampled. Most other impact melt-like rocks (from and Boynton (1992), Sharpton et al. (1992), and Schuraytz et al. elsewhere in the C1 and Y6 cores and from the S1 core) are (1994). Our samples came from ~1,390 (C1/N9), ~1,297 described as “glass” or “microcrystalline” (Hildebrand et al., (Y6/N17), and ~1,378 (Y6/N19) m below sea level. 1991; Quezada Muñeton et al., 1992; Kring and Boynton, 1992) The matrix portions of all six Y6 thin sections are aphanitic or as “fine- to medium-grained coherent crystalline” (Sharpton and are dominated by grains <10 µm across (Fig. 1), albeit leu- et al., 1992). Sharpton et al. (1992) described Y6/N19 as having cocratic, texturally diverse but generally much coarser grained a “medium- to coarse-grained melt rock matrix,” but a more lithic clasts are incongruously sprinkled throughout (~20 vol%). detailed recent description by three of the same authors (Schu- The extraordinarily wide range of feldspar compositions in the raytz et al., 1994) indicates that their sample from Y6/N19, like Y6/N19 samples (Fig. 2a) tends to confirm the textural evidence the two we studied, consists mainly of an aphanitic matrix with for origin as a clast-rich impact magma (cf. Cedillo-Pardo et al., grains ~10 µm across. The textural contrast between C1/N9 (and 1992). Pyroxene compositions show considerable variation C1/N10) and the other Chicxulub samples follows an important between matrix portions of two nearby Y6/N19 samples. Aside trend among all impact melt products: Matrix grain size tends from En-Fs-Wo variations (Fig. 2b), the Y6/N19-10 pyroxenes to anticorrelate with abundance of clasts (Simonds et al., 1976). are remarkably rich in Al2O3: 7/20 analyses >4.0 wt%, maxi- This trend arises because abundant clasts have a chilling effect mum = 5.6%, whereas the Y6/N19-11 pyroxenes all have on the melt. ≤1.42 wt%. Compositionally, the sampled Chicxulub impact melt Making up roughly half of the Y6/N19-11 thin section is a products are similar to the bulk continental crust, and to the large fragment of a granophyric or myrmekitic rock (Fig. 1e) of overall composition of the Sudbury Igneous Complex (Table 1). extraordinary mineralogy: The only major minerals are quartz + But they are consistently SiO2 poor, MgO rich, and K2O poor in feldspar (compositionally diverse: Fig. 2), and ~8% anhedral, comparison to the upper (granophyre) portion of the SIC (SiO2 locally vermicular, anhydrite. Superficially (i.e., mainly quartz + ~ 68.4wt%) and even in comparison to the scattered impact- feldspar, intergrown in a granophyric texture) this fragment melted components of the Onaping Formation (e.g., the rela- resembles the granophyre layer that constitutes the upper half of tively large “melt bodies,” average SiO2 ~ 69.0 wt%), based on the Sudbury Igneous Complex (Naldrett and Hewins, 1984). numerous analyses by Muir and Peredery (1984) and Chai and The fragment is not genetically analogous, however, because it Eckstrand (1993). If the Chicxulub impact magma initially contains at least two grains of quartz with multiple sets of planar formed with a composition similar to bulk SIC (which is very elements indicative of shock metamorphism. Thus, at least the similar to bulk continental crust), the Chicxulub samples show quartz (and presumably also the intergrown feldspar) of this little effect of the fractional crystallization that putatively pro- clast was part of the basement at the time of the impact. The ori- duced the vertical layering of the SIC. gin of the anhydrite is an interesting second-order question. Its All known samples of Chicxulub impact melt products are largely vermicular habit tends to suggest that it (or more likely fine grained and clast rich compared to the main mass of the melt or vapor that precipitated it) was injected into a porously SIC. Only 150 m from the edge of the SIC, average grain size brecciated granitic protolith during the early stages of cooling (maximum dimension) is ~0.75 mm (Naldrett and Hewins, of the impact melt. Volcanic eruptions occasionally produce 1984), and SIC rocks almost uniformly lack perceptible clasts. anhydrite, in cases in which the parent magma features unusu- Rocks with textures roughly similar to the Chicxulub samples ally high sulfur content and probably also high oxygen fugacity are fairly common in the Onaping Formation, however, as thin (Carroll and Webster, 1994). “veinlets” or subrounded fragments “a few m” across and as Among our samples, the coarsest matrix by far is that of larger, fluidal textured “melt bodies” with typical dimensions C1/N9, with grains mostly ~0.3 mm in maximum dimension. of the order 100 m (Muir and Peredery, 1984). Possibly the Texturally and mineralogically, this sample strongly resembles available Chicxulub impact melt products are all from an Onap- C1/N10 (Schuraytz et al., 1994). Only six clasts are discernible, ing analog, overlying a SIC-like large mass of relatively coarse all very fine grained (~20 µm), totaling ~2 vol% of the rock grained rocks. (Fig. 1a). A minor proportion (1%) of the matrix consists of iso- However, the Chicxulub samples are fine grained even lated uncommonly coarse (up to 1.6 mm) feldspar and pyrox- compared to analogous Onaping materials. Onaping rocks are ene grains similar to those described as phenocrysts (up to either suevitic breccias, with vastly higher fragmental compo- Mega-impact melt petrology (Chicxulub, Sudbury, and the Moon) 109

Figure 1. Chicxulub thin sections, viewed in transmitted light, all at similar scale (each view is ~27 mm wide): (a) C1/N9, (b) Y6/N17-2, (c) Y6/N17-9, (d) Y6/N19-10, (e) Y6/N19-11. Left half of (e) shows part of the anhydrite-rich granophyre.

andesite” over 200 m thick. The Y6/N17 samples came from near the middle of a 60-m-thick continuous “extrusive ande- site” layer, and the Y6/N19 samples came from ~12 m below the top of a continuous layer ~220 m thick (Meyerhoff et al., 1994). Possibly the Chicxulub impact melt was chilled with unusual efficiency because (as seems likely, at least near the top of the melt complex) the suspended clasts originally included large proportions of carbonate and sulfate, which tended to nents (as opposed to melt-derived matrix components) than undergo heat-consuming vaporization (cf. the section “Inter- available Chicxulub impact melt products, or “melt body” pretation of impact ‘melt rock’ textures: Clast Darwinism”). materials. The melt bodies typically have aphanitic chilled mar- Another potentially crucial Chicxulub/Sudbury contrast will be gins, but their cores are coarse grained compared to the Chicxu- discussed in the section “Near-Penokean Sudbury versus stable lub samples: generally 0.2 to 0.5 mm but with quartz up to Chicxulub.” 4 mm across (Muir and Peredery, 1984). The finer grain size of VOLUME OF IMPACT MELT AS A FUNCTION OF the Chicxulub samples is probably not a consequence of sys- CRATER/BASIN SIZE tematically smaller dimensions of individual Chicxulub “melt bodies,” because according to Lopez Ramos (1975) the Chicxu- Large-scale fractional crystallization (formation of cumu- lub cores C1, S1, and Y6 all contain layers of pure “extrusive lates) is only possible where cooling is sufficiently slow to 110 P. H. Warren and Others

ume with the volume of the transient crater. The transient crater is a zone that is mobilized in horizontally outward (including downward) directions during the early stages of crater forma- tion. Subsequent peripheral collapse (and, in large impacts, central uplift) modifies the transient crater into a shallower but wider final crater. Substituting from an equation on p. 119 of Melosh (1989), assuming that depth/D for the transient crater = 0.3, and neglecting possible density contrast between the un- melted displaced matter and the melt, equation (1) implies that the impact melt volume is:

× –9 π 0.83 2.17 0.33 Vmelt,1 = 6 10 g Dtc vi (2) The second method is a similar power-law relationship proposed by Grieve and Cintala (1992):

3.85 Vmelt,2 = cDtc (3)

where c is a constant related to the impactor density and veloc- ity (for a chondritic impactor at 15 to 25 km s–1, c = 0.000621 to 0.000715) and Dtc is the diameter of the transient crater. For nonterrestrial application, results from equation (3) are multi- plied times g0.83, by analogy to equation (2). For large craters such as those considered in this chapter, equation (2) gives ~30% higher melt volumes than equation (3). Estimating the transient crater diameter Dtc based on the observed “final,” “structural” or “crater rim” diameter is prob- lematical, especially for large multiring basins. In this chapter, we approximate the translation by averaging results from the semiempirical models of Chyba (1991) and Croft (1985). These models imply that for Chicxulub, Sudbury, and all the lunar Figure 2. Phase-compositional (electron microprobe) data for Chicxu- multiring basins that will be mentioned, Dtc is uniformly 0.45 to lub impact melt products: (a) An-Ab-Or proportions in feldspars and × feldspathic (isotropic) glasses and (b) En-Fs-Wo proportions in pyrox- 0.54 the final D. Differences between results from the Chyba enes. Data for Y6/N19-11 “granitic” feldspars refer to a large clast of (1991) and Croft (1985) models are almost negligible. None- anhydrite granophyre that apparently existed (possibly sans anhydrite) theless, for large basins these models are highly uncertain before the impact (see text). because both are predicated upon the same reasonable but unproven assumption: that the outermost prominent ring on each multiring basin is analogous to the solitary rim that allow diffusive processes (such as chemical diffusion and ther- defines diameter for a smaller crater. mal convection) within the magma to deplete the overall melt in Ring formation may be a fundamentally different process the constituents of successive layers of crystals forming (or at from the collapse that transforms a transient crater into a non- least accumulating) only along the fringes of the magma. In ringed crater (Melosh, 1989, 1995). The abundance of large general, cooling rate correlates inversely, and potential for con- (nominal D ~ 1,000 km) multiring basins on the Moon (and vection correlates positively, with the total volume of a magma with decreasingly robust statistics also on Mercury and Mars) is body. Thus, the total volume of melt formed in an impact is three times greater than would be expected based on any simple among the most obvious factors in determining the potential for extrapolation from abundances of smaller peak-ring craters fractional crystallization by the impact melt. (Strom and Neukum, 1988). One interpretation for this surfeit In this chapter, we estimate impact melt volume as a func- would be that impactors (asteroids and/or comets) with the tion of crater size by averaging results from two different semi- right combination of size and velocity to form ~1000-km basins empirical methods. One method is based on equation. 7.10.2 of are more common than would be extrapolated from abundances Melosh (1989): of less powerful impactors. Alternatively, however, the surfeit of ~1000-km basins may be an indication that the outermost melting/displacement (mass ratio) = 1.6 × 10–7 (g D )0.83 v 0.33 (1) tc i prominent ring on a multiring basin is generally far more dis- where g is acceleration of gravity and vi is impactor velocity. tant from the rim of the transient crater than would be extrapo- Following Melosh (1989), we equate the “displacement” vol- lated from Dtc/Drim relationships among smaller craters. If so, Mega-impact melt petrology (Chicxulub, Sudbury, and the Moon) 111 ES* ) (kg/m/s) 3 ρµ (kg/m 99.5 2450 670 † O Sum 2 H 5 O 2 for hydrous melts, Bottinga and Weill, 1972, style Weill, Bottinga and melts, hydrous for on data of Christian et al., 1976; Lindstrom et al., ed on two estimates in Condie, 1982, and one from estimates in Condie, ed on two mix. and Carmichael, 1990. OP 2 2.6 0.09 ….… O contents of Chicxulub samples may be high due to sec- O contents of Chicxulub samples may 2 † O (Na OK 2 2 , and 1.0 wt% H 3 O 2 = 1230° C)

T 0.1 2.8 8.1 3.9 MnO MgO CaO Na † 3 O 2 ….… O, 3.5 wt% FeO, 1.0 wt% Fe 3.5 wt% FeO, O, = 1280° C) 2 †

T FeO Fe 3 O 2 Al = 1150° C) 2

T = 1150° C)

T = 1150° C) TiO

T 2 SiO 62.6 0.559.4 14.5 0.8 4.4 15.7 5.8 1.7 0.08 3.9 5.6 3.0 2.2 0.24 1.3 99.7 2530 360 § † TABLE 1. COMPOSITIONS OF MEGA-IMPACT MELT PRODUCTS AND SIMILAR(?) MATERIALS, AND CORRESPONDING MODEL MELT DENSITIES AND VISCOSITI AND SIMILAR(?) MATERIALS, 1. PRODUCTS DENSITIES AND TABLE MELT AND CORRESPONDING MODEL MELT COMPOSITIONS OF MEGA-IMPACT For Chicxulub, density and viscosity estimates assume 3.5 wt% Na Chicxulub, For instead of canonical 37:63 assuming a 2:1 mix of norite and granophyre initial composition of Sudbury Igneous Complex, Possible Taylor, 1982.Taylor, intrusion data are from Carmichael et al., 1974. Layered are based lunar impact melt rocks compositions for Average Viscosities (P = 1 bar) are averages of results from methods of Shaw, 1972; of results from methods Shaw, Viscosities (P = 1 bar) are averages et al., 1987; Persikov 1972 ( Weill, and Bottinga other methods). results by of hydrous/anhydrous based on ratios results are extrapolations “MELTS” calculations are based on liquidus estimates using used for of M. program Temperatures S. Ghiorso (see text). Chicxulub compositions are from Sharpton et al., 1991. et al., 1992, and Hildebrand continental crust composition is bas Average 1990; et al., 1984; McKinley and Rhodes et al., 1974. A15 average (Imbrium)A15 average A16G2 (Nectaris) (Serenitatis)A17 average 47.3 from Lange constraints 1970, using updated molar volume Weill, *Densities (P = 1 bar) calculated in the manner of Bottinga and 46.2 1.5 45.2 1.5 17.8 0.8 18.0 8.9 21.9 9.2 0.0 8.2 0.0 0.12 0.0 0.12 11.9 12.3 0.08 11.0 10.2 11.2 0.6 13.2 0.7 0.33 0.5 0.26 0.5 0.17 0.28 0.00 0.19 0.00 99.9 99.6 0.00 2720 100.3 2730 2720 8 6 11 Sudbury, ??initial Sudbury, Collins, 1934 averageCollins, continental crust (modeled at Earth’s 63.1 0.7 14.7 5.2 1.5 0.09 2.9 4.0 3.2 2.9 0.23 1.2 99.8 2440 720 N10 - SharptonN17 - lit. avg.N19mtrx - SharptonAverage 64.4 61.2 62.1 0.5 0.4 0.5 14.9 14.7 13.9 4.6 3.9 4.8 ….… ….… ….… 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.8 2.7 3.0 5.5 9.3 9.6 4.3 2.7 4.6 2.7 2.9 2.2 ….… ….… ….… ….… 0.09 99.8 97.9 ….… 100.8 Chicxulub impact melt rocks (modeled at Chicxulub impact melt rocks (modeled at Igneous Complex Sudbury averageLiterature intrusions (modeled at layered parent melts) of classic (possible Chilled margins 60.5 0.7 16.4 3.3 3.1 0.14 2.9 5.7 3.4 2.4 0.2 1.2 100.0 2500 270 † § MuskoxSkaergaardStillwater basin origin (modeled at of possible Lunar impact melt rocks 48.1 50.7 50.7 1.2 1.1 0.5 17.2 13.6 17.6 8.4 9.1 9.9 1.3 1.2 0.3 0.16 0.18 0.15 8.6 9.7 7.7 11.4 11.2 10.5 2.4 1.8 1.9 0.25 0.6 0.24 0.10 0.10 0.09 1.06 0.59 100.2 0.48 99.8 2690 99.9 2690 2680 11 13 29 ondary alteration). hydrous 112 P. H. Warren and Others then any model that regards the outermost prominent ring as a of the zone of impact melting. The shape for the initial distri- crater rim will systematically overestimate the size of the tran- bution of the melt formed in a major impact is unfortunately not sient crater and thus the volume of impact melt. Despite these well constrained. Grieve and Cintala (1992) assume a roughly caveats, we adopt as a nominal working model the customary hemispherical shape for the zone of melting, but Tonks and view that the outermost prominent ring of a multiring basin Melosh (1993) give equal consideration to a model in which the defines a structural diameter analogous to the rim diameter of a melt region is a nearly complete sphere truncated on one side smaller crater. by the planet surface, saying “reality lies somewhere between An additional area of uncertainty is the impact velocity; a these two extremes.” Note that the depth to base of melting range of 12 to 70 km/s, encompassing nearly all conceivable zone is generally many times greater than the thickness of the major impacts, would shift the implied melting/displacement melt sheet because the melt sheet’s diameter, in these models, is ratio (i.e., the estimated Vmelt) by a factor of 0.9 to 1.5. The far greater than the diameter of even a hemispherical melting velocities adopted for modeling purposes are the average veloc- zone. Realistically, the original disposition of the impact melt is ities for Earth-asteroidal and Moon-asteroidal impacts, as esti- more diffuse, forming largely as veins and pockets amid sur- mated by Chyba (1991). viving solids; compare the impact melts in the deeply eroded Figure 3 shows—for Chicxulub, Sudbury, various lunar Vredefort structure (French and Nielsen, 1990) and realize, as basins, and a few moderately large terrestrial craters—Vmelt cal- discussed in a later section, not all of the melt can be expected culated from equations (1) and (3), expressed as thickness of an to aggregate into the melt sheet. Thus, the ratio (depth to base idealized melt sheet. The idealized melt sheet contains 100% of of melting zone)/(thickness of idealized melt sheet) implied by the impact melt, aggregated into a volume of shallow-cylinder Figure 3 should be regarded as a lower limit. shape, with the cylinder’s diameter equal to the average of Comparison with observed craters (Grieve and Cintala,

(1) Dtc, and (2) half the “final” nominal basin D (models (1) 1992) suggests that the slope of the Dtc versus Vmelt relationship and (2) are nearly identical, for most of the basins considered). (i.e., the relative increase in Vmelt as a function of Dtc) is mod- This choice for diameter of the melt sheet is based on rough eled fairly well, at least up to transient crater D of the order analogy to the Grieve et al. (1991) interpretation of the Sudbury 60 km (final crater D of the order 100 km, terrestrial g), by both structure and to interpretations from drill-hole and gravity equations (2) and (3). However, we suspect that the impact melt results for the Chicxulub region (Sharpton et al., 1993; Hilde- volumes predicted by (2) and (3) may be systematically high. brand et al., 1995), which suggest that the main mass of impact For craters with estimated Dtc in the range 4 to 60 km, Vmelt melt was limited to a region roughly 100 to 120 km in diameter, predicted by equation (3) is generally about two times higher that is, 0.6 to 1.3 times the (variously inferred) Chicxulub tran- than estimated actual volume of impact melt (Grieve and Cin- sient crater D. tala, 1992). Most of these “observed volumes of impact melt Figure 3 also shows two estimates for the depth to the base rocks” are highly uncertain, and in some cases Grieve and Cin- tala (1992) regard them as “minimum” estimates. Note, how- ever, that such estimates customarily regard any and all “melt rock” as former melt, whereas equation (1) suggests that for craters of this size range the “melt rocks” are initially only roughly half molten. For Sudbury, the idealized melt sheet thickness (Fig. 3) is three times the average observed thickness of the SIC: 2.5 km, although the maximum observed thickness is ~4 km (Naldrett and Hewins, 1984).

IMPORTANCE OF THE MELTING/ DISPLACEMENT RATIO

Equation (1) implies that the melting/displacement ratio in major impacts varies enormously as a function of crater size as well as planetary g (Fig. 4a). In this section, we examine the implications of these variations for crystallization behavior of impact melts. Accelerated cooling of magma during digestion of Figure 3. Model predictions for impact melt volume as a function of suspended clastic debris transient crater size, estimated from equations 2 and 3. Also shown are translations from total melt volume into maximum depth of melting The common expression “impact melt sheet” can be seri- (assuming hemispherical or spherical shape for the melting zone) and ously misleading. An aggregated “melt sheet” is in general not into idealized thickness of a “melt sheet” (see text). truly a melt but an impact-generated magma (melt/crystal sus- Mega-impact melt petrology (Chicxulub, Sudbury, and the Moon) 113

Figure 4. (a) Melting/displacement ratio calculated from equation 1, shown as a function of crater size and impact velocity. For Earth and Moon, three curves shown correspond to Chyba’s (1991) impact velocity estimates for collision with an average short-period comet, an average asteroid, and an extremely slow asteroid. For asteroid Vesta, two curves correspond to impact velocity of 5 to 26 km/s. Also shown, at right, are translations (very approximate!) into initial proportion of clasts in the “melt sheet” (see text). (b) Average peak-shock pressure of clastic debris suspended in the impact melt and of the entire unmelted portion of the transient crater, calculated by combination of equa- tion 6 with the geometrical model shown in the inset cartoons (concentric half circles represent con- tours of peak shock P), and further assumptions described in the text. The lighter curves show results assuming a value of 2.2 for the exponent in equation 6, to illustrate the effect of the higher values favored by some shock-attenuation models (Melosh, 1989). pension), with large proportions of suspended solids that survive refers to craters the size of Manicouagan (D ~ 95 km). As will the impact and are swept along into (or buoyantly ascend into or be discussed in a later section, average initial clast T is probably fall back down into) the melt as it aggregates to form the sheet. not uniformly so low but is a function of the size of the crater An important distinction between such an impact-generated and the preimpact regional geology. In any case, the initial magma and a typical endogenously produced phenocryst- clasts are much cooler than the initial melt. bearing magma is that the impact magma’s suspended solids are The melt’s potential for fractional crystallization will be for the most part much cooler than the impact melt. Until these diminished initially through heat loss in warming the clasts, but suspended solids either settle out or dissolve into the melt, they even after the clasts are warmed to near-liquidus T, melting or accelerate the cooling of the melt, and thus effectively dampen assimilating them may consume significant latent heat. The ini- the potential for fractional crystallization. tial clasts will generally be significantly removed in composition Petrologic studies of impact melt–derived rocks at a vari- from equilibrium with the melt. As Bowen (1928) emphasized, ety of moderately large terrestrial impact craters indicate that assimilative reactions between disequilibrium solids and silicate recognizable clasts of diverse provenance tend to be evenly dis- melts are always either endothermic or, if exothermic, cause an tributed throughout the sheet, presumably due to turbulent mix- increase in the solid/melt ratio. As an extremely simple example ing during aggregation of the melt (Phinney and Simonds, of this effect, consider an impact magma that initially contains a 1977). Only at Manicouagan does the sheet feature a relatively large proportion of quartz as suspended clasts, but in which frac- heterogeneous clast distribution (Grieve and Floran, 1978). tional crystallization of the melt would require deposition of a Presumably, the melt temperature is also largely homogenized thick sequence of gabbroic or noritic cumulates before onset of through this turbulent mixing. However, studies of shock meta- quartz crystallization (cf. the SIC, where a thick layer of norite morphic effects, applied to terrestrial as well as lunar impact formed before and below the granophyre). If a large proportion melt breccias, indicate that the suspended solids are originally of the initial quartz settles among the gabbroic early crystals, the remarkably cool. In the estimation of Simonds et al. (1976), ultimate vertical layering, in terms of SiO2, is considerably 50 to 100°C would be representative for the clastic matter in dampened. Avoidance of this dampening effect requires that “large terrestrial impacts”; in this context, “large” presumably rapid cooling and/or crystallization of the melt supply latent heat 114 P. H. Warren and Others for melting the quartz. At roughly 1150°C, converting, say, 20% of the initial magma from quartz to melt would require latent heat equivalent to cooling by 70 degrees. This is only an extremely simple example, but the same basic effect operates if initial mafic silicate or feldspar crystals have to be “made over” into more refractory solid solution compositions. Of course, once signifi- cant crystallization of equilibrium solids commences, latent heat plays a different role, slowing the cooling of the magma. If the impact magma has a low viscosity and a favorable density contrast between suspended solids and melt, the initial suspended solids might conceivably settle out before greatly cooling the melt. However, thermal equilibration between the clasts (most of which are expected to be small because of per- vasive brecciation) and the melt probably takes place within a time scale of the order 102 to 103 seconds (Onorato et al., 1978). Application of Stokes Law (e.g., equation 6-229 of Tur- cotte and Schubert, 1982) to even the most favorable crater con- sidered in Figure 3 (Boltysh, assuming melt viscosity of 400 kg Figure 5. Potential cooling effect of solid debris suspended in an − − − m 1 s 1 and clast-melt density contrast of 400 kg m 3) indicates impact magma, modeled in a highly simplified (i.e., probably conserv- that only clasts >0.1 m in diameter would settle more than 10% ative; see text) fashion, based on equation 5. of the idealized melt sheet thickness in 103 seconds. Note, too, that if cool clasts become concentrated, either by settling or ≈ some effect of turbulence, into the lower half of a sill-like mag- tively. We assume that Cp,m /Cp,x 1.1 (Stebbins et al., 1984; matic system (presumably cooling mainly through its roof), Newton, 1987). Figure 5 indicates that a wide range of scenar- their cooling effect will tend to forestall thermal convection. ios is possible, extending in principle from negligible cooling, Simonds et al. (1976) estimated that the Serenitatis and in impacts with very high melting/displacement ratios or very Manicouagan impact magmas both initially consisted of ~30% hot initial suspended solids, to rapid quenching of the melt, in cool clasts. Using this for a very rough calibration, the right cases in which the suspended solids are abundant and cool. side of Figure 4a shows the melting/displacement scale trans- lated into initial clast contents, modeled by simply assuming Average initial temperature of suspended clastic debris that the impact magma represents all of the melt mixed with suspended solids equivalent to 10% of the displaced (transient In principle, the average initial temperature of the clasts crater) mass: can be estimated based on cratering models. Passage of an md/ impact shock wave through a rock induces a rise in postshock T φ=1 ± m/d + 01. (4) that is roughly in direct proportion to the maximum shock pres- sure. Unfortunately, even for solid silicates, experimental con- where φ is the (initial) fraction of suspended solids and m/d is straints (e.g., Raikes and Ahrens, 1979; Langenhorst, 1994) the melting/displacement (mass) ratio. This method for esti- establish this P-T relationship only to within a factor of ~1.4, mating φ as a function of crater size (and g) is obviously very and material properties (most notably porosity) can also have a approximate, but in view of the great relative variation in m/d, major influence. The greatest uncertainty, however, concerns and thus probably also φ, among the craters considered, even a the provenance of the clasts in relation to the geometry of the crude estimate is worthwhile. transient crater and the melting zone. Figure 5 shows the potential cooling effect of the sus- The geometrical relationship between the zone of melting pended solids, modeled purely in terms of specific heat con- (assumed hemispherical to spherical) and the transient crater sumed in warming the initial suspended solids (i.e., ignoring (parabolic) is clearly sensitive to the melting/displacement ratio likely further cooling due to latent heat in melting or “make- (Figure 4b). Because peak shock P falls sharply with distance over” of the solids). In this model, the diminution of melt tem- from the zone of melting (in which the average peak shock P is ∆ perature Tm is related to the rise in temperature of the crystals just high enough to induce general melting, i.e., roughly 60 GPa: ∆ Tx by: Melosh, 1989), only clasts derived from close to the zone of  φC  ∆∆= p,x melting will be greatly heated in advance of the diffusive heat- TTmx  (5)  fCp,m  ing that occurs at the expense of the melt. In general, attenuation of peak shock P as a function of φ≡ ∝ −n ≈ where f is the (initial) fraction of melt (f + 1), and Cp,x and radial distance r is expected to follow P r , where n 2 Cp,m are the heat capacities of the crystals and melt, respec- (e.g., Melosh, 1989; Chen et al., 1994) (P decays more rapidly Mega-impact melt petrology (Chicxulub, Sudbury, and the Moon) 115 in a central zone, less than roughly three projectile radii from the transient crater. Results from this procedure, assuming a the point of an impact, but this zone is virtually all melted or hemispherical melting zone, are shown in Figure 4b. vaporized, or else ejected from the crater, in cratering events as The absolute values of these predicted pressures are obvi- large as those considered here). A P-decay model recom- ously uncertain. Analogous models assuming a spherical shape mended by Melosh (1989) is: for the melting zone result in higher Pac by a factor of about 1.5. However, several aspects of Figure 4b are probably significant. ρ 1.87 1.87 P(r) = 0 [C + Su0(r0 /r) ] u0 (r0 /r) (6) The “unmelted TC” curve should represent a conservative upper limit on Pac for all but the highest melting/displacement (m/d) ρ where 0 is the preimpact target density, C and S are equation- impacts. We expect significant variation in Pac, if only as a func- of-state constants appropriate to the target material, r0 is a ref- tion of the m/d ratio. For m/d in the range of Chicxulub/ erence radius ~ the radius of the impactor ri, and u0 is the initial Sudbury–sized terrestrial basins or the South Pole Aitken lunar × particle velocity (= 0.5 the impact velocity) at r = r0. Based basin, we expect Pac (and thus, in general, the average initial on Melosh’s (1989) Table AII.2, we assume C = 3,580 m s−1 clast ∆T) to be roughly half the level associated with general and S (which is nondimensional) = 1.35. Modeling the zone of melting of the target. For the many lunar basins with D in the melting as a hemisphere with radius rm, we determine ri /rm 800 to 1,200-km range, we expect Pac and average initial clast ∆ using Melosh’s (1989) equation 7.10.1a and rtc /rm as a function T to be well below half the level associated with general target of the melting/displacement ratio (assuming that depth/D for melting. Even the largest of impact melts on an asteroid should the transient crater = 0.3 and neglecting possible density con- have clasts that are on average negligibly warmed from their trast between the unmelted displaced matter and the melt). We preimpact T. In any impact that induces significant melting, take r0 /ri to be 1.2, which gives, for impact velocity of the order finite proportions of clasts will form at both extremes of initial ≈ 12 km/s, P 59 GPa at r = rm. Exact choices for most of these T: from virtually unwarmed to the solidus T. Nonetheless, the parameters are not important, because the goal is simply to set average initial clast T (i.e., Pac), and consequently the statistical up a model in which P, attenuating according to equation (6), is variance in initial clast T, must be strongly correlated with m/d. roughly 60 GPa at r = rm. Given this model for distribution of peak shock P around the point of impact, we then can calculate Interpretation of impact “melt rock” textures: (using models dividing the volume of a cube with side Clast Darwinism 6 length = Dtc into 10 cells) peak shock P within the unmelted portion of the transient crater as a function of the melting/dis- A low proportion of perceptibly surviving clasts in a large placement ratio. impact “melt sheet,” such as (according to many interpreta- As in equation (4), we assume that only a volume equiva- tions) the Sudbury Igneous Complex, does not necessarily lent to 10% of the volume of the transient crater contributes clas- imply that the proportion of clasts in the newly formed sheet tic debris to the “melt sheet.” For modeling purposes, we assume was equally low or that portions of the sheet without percepti- that this clastic material is exclusively derived from the upper- ble clasts were once completely molten. Simonds et al. (1976) most available (unmelted) portion of the transient crater. A ran- observed that degree of clast digestion in impact melt systems dom sampling of the unmelted portion of transient crater would is correlated with initial clast/melt ratio. We now know that ini- clearly be inappropriate because: (1) rarefaction effects dampen tial clast/melt ratio is in general a function of the melting/dis- peak shock P for all locations close to the surface (Chen et al., placement ratio, that is, a function of (primarily) crater size and 1994), (2) much of the near-surface component of the transient g (Figure 4), and that clasts in a large impact melt system prob- crater that is not melted is ejected to points beyond the perime- ably feature high statistical variance in their initial T. In a suffi- ter of the sheet, (3) collapse processes during modification of the ciently large (high m/d) impact, only a minority of the coarsest transient crater add materials originally beyond the transient and coolest clasts will survive in perceptible form. crater rim to the mix of clasts in the sheet, and (4) in reality the Clasts are probably initially coolest near the top of the initial melting is not so well concentrated into a hemisphere (or sheet, where their provenance is relatively shallow (i.e., cooler sphere), and initial proximity to veins and pockets of melt prob- before the impact and partially protected from shock by rarefac- ably enhances the fraction of uncommonly hot solids that tion effects) and the clast(cool)/melt(hot) ratio is relatively high become clasts in the sheet. Note that (1) and (3) tend to reduce (as near any margin of the system). Clasts are also more likely to the expected average clast peak shock P (and thus T), whereas survive near the top of the system because cooling is generally (2) and (4) have the opposite effect. We assume that (1) + (3) fastest in that direction. Avermann and Brockmeyer (1992) more than offset (2) + (4). Our model does not directly address describe the uppermost granophyre of the SIC as a “low fragment all these complexities, but to roughly compensate for their prob- content (~5%) impact melt” in “largely gradational” (cf. Muir able net effect, we model the clastic material as exclusively and Pederery, 1984) contact with a mostly unmelted (80 to 90%) derived from the uppermost unmelted portion of the transient breccia layer above. In both of these layers, the clasts are exclu- crater, leading to lower average clast peak shock Pac than would sively metasediments of relatively shallow provenance, and yet be predicted by averaging over the entire unmelted portion of “many fragments are corroded or even disintegrated.” The rate at 116 P. H. Warren and Others which within the granophyre perceptible clast content grades from the transient crater as a function of melting/displacement downward to zero was not discussed by Avermann and Brock- and various assumptions regarding the shape of the melting meyer (1992), but the zero point, and the initial clast content in zone. In principle, these proportions could be calculated by general, probably cannot be determined by petrographic obser- application of Pappus’s Rule concerning volumes of solids of vation. Even where no portion of a rock from a large impact revolution. In practice, we found it easier to calculate the vol- melt system consists of clasts still in perceptible form, a signifi- ume proportions using the same approach as for Fig. 2b, that is, cant portion may consist of former clasts that have completely plugging equations for the boundaries of the ejection, melting, disintegrated into individual crystals or unrecognizable small and transient crater volumes into a computer program that clumps of crystals, yet have never completely melted. And still divides the overall volume into 5 × 106 cells. These calculations more may consist of material that became locally 100% molten ignore the relatively minor proportion (roughly one-tenth of the too late (as a result of the chilling and stagnating effects of melt volume) of impact vapor, which probably forms mainly unmelted clastic matter nearby) to ever be truly assimilated into within the volume treated as ejected melt in the calculations. the main mass of melt. The total ejecta (melted + unmelted) is uniformly 42 vol% of the transient crater. Proportion of melt ejected from the transient crater As discussed above, the shape of the melting zone is prob- As reviewed by Melosh (1989), cratering models and ably intermediate between spherical and hemispherical. Figure 6 experiments indicate that a region extending to a depth of ≈ one- shows results assuming shapes where a sphere is truncated at third the depth of the transient crater is ejected beyond the tran- 0%, 12.5%, 25%, 37.5%, and 50% of its diameter. For the 50%- sient crater rim, that is, to regions generally too distal to truncated (i.e., hemispherical) model, and even for the 25%- contribute to the main melt sheet. The exact shape of the ejected truncated model, low-moderate melting/displacement ratios (cf. zone is uncertain, but in cross section it probably resembles the Fig. 4a) result in large proportions of the total impact melt being dual-asymmetric-parabolic shape shown in Figure 6, where ejected from the transient crater. However, even the hemi- depth/diameter is exactly 0.3 for the parabolic transient crater spherical model results in most of the melt remaining in (or and 0.1 for the ejection zone, and the detailed shape of the ejec- below) the transient crater if melting/displacement is greater tion zone is modeled after Melosh’s (1989) Fig. 5.13. Assuming than about 30%. Figure 6 also shows, for the 25%-truncated this geometry, we can calculate the proportion of melt ejected model, the fraction of the ejecta that is melt. Note that this frac- tion increases steeply, constituting significant proportions of the total ejecta, after melting/displacement exceeds roughly 20%. INFLUENCES OF REGIONAL GEOLOGY: MAINLY COMPOSITIONAL EFFECTS Melt/solid density relationships

The impact melt that forms within the unejected portion of the transient crater, or in large impacts partly below the transi- ent crater, will not aggregate into a compact near-surface “sheet” with 100% efficiency. Large proportions of adjacent unmelted material mix with the melt during the processes of rebound, collapse, and so on, that affect regions just outside the melting zone. Shortly after the impact, buoyancy forces cause the melt to migrate apart from the solids, but the melt also starts to crystallize as it is cooled by the solids. In general, the aggre- gation efficiency will be sensitive to the density contrast be- tween the impact melt and the unmelted materials that initially surround it. A melt’s density can be precisely estimated as a function of composition by summing the partial molar volumes of the oxide components (Bottinga and Weill, 1970). Variations related to temperature and to even moderate ranges of pressure are well Figure 6. Fraction of melt ejected from the transient crater calculated constrained (Lange, 1994). Compared to the Chicxulub and as a function of melting/displacement and shape of the melting zone Sudbury melts or to average continental crust, lunar impact (indicated by black symbols). Inset cartoons show shapes assumed for transient crater and ejection zone (consistent among all models melts are consistently richer in dense FeO, MgO, and CaO and shown). Also shown, for an intermediate-shaped melting zone, is frac- poorer in the low-density components SiO2, alkalis, and H2O tion of the ejecta that is melt. (Table 1). As a result, even though lunar melts form at higher T, Mega-impact melt petrology (Chicxulub, Sudbury, and the Moon) 117 they are denser (Fig. 7) by roughly 300 kg m–3. The Chicxulub the surface to 4% at 5 km depth (Moore, 1989). Extrapolation –3 melt was probably rich in CO2 (roughly 1,420 kg m , but not of this trend suggests that average porosity of the upper 30 km included in these calculations) and in sulfur species, for which is roughly 3%. Thus, porosity probably diminished the average molar densities are unfortunately unknown (Lange, 1994). How- bulk density of the outer 30 km of the target by ~2% at Chicxu- ever, we find a strong (r = 0.97) correlation between the low-T, lub, and by even less at Sudbury. The lunar crust is pervasively low-P densities of solid oxides and Lange’s (1994) correspond- brecciated, with vacuous (0 kg m−3) porosity. Even excluding ing 1,400ºC partial molar densities, and this correlation extrapo- the most porous breccia type (regolith breccias, possibly abun- –3 2− lates to ~2,000 kg m for SO4 (assumed, by analogy with CO2 dant only in the outer few tens of meters of the crust), rock 2− and CO3 , to have similar density to SO3). Thus, carbon and porosities are typically 4 to 17% and average roughly 11% sulfur probably both tended to make the Chicxulub melt’s den- (Warren and Rasmussen, 1987). Most of this porosity is proba- sity even lower than suggested by Figure 7. bly squeezed out in the outer 2 to 3 km, but seismic data sug- The density of the upper crust in the Sudbury region is esti- gest significant porosity persists down to 20 to 25 km (Taylor, mated from gravity data to be ≈2730 kg m–3 (McGrath and 1982). Pressure at the base of the lunar crust (~64 km) is about Broome, 1994), which—assuming porosity is typical of the the same as at 12 km in the Earth. upper ~10 km of continental crust, at roughly 3 to 6% (Meissner, As a by-product of shock P, large-scale average porosity 1986)—implies a pore-free density of roughly 2,810 kg m–3. induced by brecciation during an impact is probably propor- n This is probably a conservatively low value for the pore-free den- tional to (r0 /r) , where by analogy to equation (6) n is roughly 2. sity of any large region of continental crust. It is higher than the Unless the melting/displacement ratio is extremely high (say density of typically andesitic impact melts (Figure 7) by roughly ≥100%), the solids within a short distance around and above the 270 to 380 kg m–3 (i.e., roughly 13%—depending on assump- impact melt will inevitably include a large proportion that have tions regarding the poorly constrained contents of low-density acquired new porosity of the order 10% or higher (based on the oxides in the melts). In contrast, a conservatively high estimate typical porosities of lunar breccias). If the density of the impact for the average density of the lunar highland crust (2,950 kg m–3, melt is not at least 10% lower than the pre-impact density of the Haines and Metzger, 1980) is only 150 to 200 kg m–3 (~6%) target crust, the melt will have neutral or even negative buoy- denser than a typical lunar impact melt (Fig. 7; in this case con- ancy in relation to a large component of the surrounding rocks. centrations of the low-density oxides are negligibly low). Thus, Figure 7 implies that at Sudbury the melt was probably Density relationships will also be affected by the target buoyant relative to all but a small fraction of the most porously- region: pre-impact porosity as well as porosity created by brec- brecciated rocks and that at Chicxulub (where pre-impact poros- ciation during the impact. Terrestrial gravity and crystallization ity was significant) the melt buoyancy was marginal in relation from pore fluids eliminate most porosity within a few kilome- to a slightly higher fraction of the surrounding rocks. But in ters of the surface. In a typical sequence of fine-grained car- lunar impacts, melt buoyancy is typically marginal or negative bonate sediment, porosity falls exponentially from 50% near relative to even moderately brecciated (<<10% new porosity) varieties of crustal rock. After the melt “sheet” aggregates, melt/solid density rela- tionships might still be important, because at least some mech- anisms of cumulate formation are enhanced by large melt/solid density contrast (Wager and Brown, 1967). At Sudbury, the major liquidus phases of the SIC were pyroxene, plagioclase, and possibly hypersthene in the lower (norite) zone and plagio- clase, K-feldspar, and quartz in the upper (granophyre) zone. Major liquidus phases of the Chicxulub impact magma were probably similar (although the pyroxene and plagioclase were probably more Ca rich). All these phases are at least 150 kg m–3 denser than any plausible SIC or Chicxulub melt. In contrast, one of the main liquidus phases of lunar impact melt, plagio- clase, would have density similar to (actually ~70 kg m–3 less dense than) the typical initial melt.

Viscosity and potential for convective stirring

Figure 7. Densities of melts with compositions of average Chicxulub The efficiency with which a large magma body differenti- impact melt rock and three different lunar impact melt types (Table 1), calculated from partial molar volumes of oxides (Lange, 1994) for a ates may be limited by the rate at which fluid (i.e., mainly con- range of pressures (the pressure gradient in the outer Moon is vective) motions supply fresh melt to crystal/melt interfaces. 0.005 GPa/km). Regarding liquidus T for these melts, see Table 1. The tendency for a magma to convect is governed by the 118 P. H. Warren and Others

Rayleigh number Ra, which is proportional to thickness3, g1, INFLUENCES OF REGIONAL GEOLOGY: MAINLY and µ–1, where µ is the viscosity (Turcotte and Schubert, 1982). THERMAL EFFECTS Viscosity of a silicate melt can be estimated as a function of composition. Table 1 shows viscosity estimates based on aver- Near-Penokean Sudbury versus stable Chicxulub aging results from three different but similar methods (Bottinga and Weill, 1972; Shaw, 1972; Persikov et al., 1987). These If the transient craters of the Sudbury and Chicxulub methods all give similar results, but for the terrestrial melts events really were 120 or more km in diameter (Deutsch and uncertainties regarding H2O (especially for Chicxulub, where Grieve, 1994; Sharpton et al., 1993), melting extended so deep the H2O content is only estimated based on analogy to Sud- that the regional geothermal gradients strongly influenced the bury) translate into order-of-magnitude (or worse) uncertainties melting/displacement ratio, the average depth provenance of in the estimated viscosities. However, it seems safe to conclude the melt feeding the central “sheet,” and the average initial that compared to classic terrestrial layered intrusions (1) lunar clast T. In the nominal (Fig. 3) model of 240-km basin genesis, impact melts have at least comparably low viscosity and (2) un- assuming a hemispherical shape, one-third of the melt origi- less Sudbury/Chicxulub–type impact melts have much higher nally forms shallower than 8 km, two-thirds forms shallower H2O than estimated for the SIC by Collins (1934), they proba- than 17 km, and the deepest melting occurs at 35 km; a spheri- bly (mainly as a result of their high SiO2 contents) have unfa- cal shape shifts these implications to 21, 34, and 55 km, respec- vorably higher viscosity. tively. Much of the shallowest-forming melt (~45%, for m/d Suspended crystals, such as marginally buoyant plagio- ~45% and hemispherical melting) gets ejected to positions clase in a lunar impact melt, may significantly enhance viscos- beyond the transient crater rim (Fig. 6) where it can scarcely ity. Figure 11 of Marsh (1981) suggests that in typical lunar aggregate into the main mass of impact magma. Thus, median impact melts (46 wt% SiO2), 20% suspended crystals would depth of origin for the main aggregation of impact magma is enhance µ by roughly nine times. 20 to 30 km, for melting zone shape ranging from hemispheri- cal to spherical. Impact into a volatile-rich terrain The Yucatán was a stable, cool carbonate platform when As noted by Kieffer and Simonds (1980), high contents of the Chicxulub event occurred. But the Sudbury impact hit a volatile materials within a target terrain can lead to two signifi- region already warmed by the Penokean Orogeny, which pro- cant effects. Latent heat of vaporization may significantly duced folding and granitic magmatism along a roughly east- enhance the chilling effect of volatile-rich clasts suspended in west axis centered around the upper peninsula of Michigan an impact melt (e.g., at 1,100°C the heat content of 1 kg of half- (Brocoum and Dalziel, 1974; Clifford, 1990). The timing of the melted silicate is matched by 0.3 kg of steam or 0.5 kg of CO2 Penokean Orogeny has recently been clarified by 37 precise gas). Also, explosive expansion of the newly formed gases may U-Pb-zircon ages reported for Proterozoic granitic intrusives enhance dispersal of the impact melt to points far from the tran- and gneisses from northern Wisconsin (as close as 500 km from sient crater (cf. Grieve and Cintala, 1992). However, only the SIC) by Sims et al. (1989). Of these 37 ages, 29 (78%) are vaporization and expansion starting from deep within the melt clustered in the range 1831 to 1871 Ma and 23 (62%) are in the zone will have a major influence on the fraction of melt blown range 1835 to 1862 Ma. The timing could hardly coincide more out of the transient crater (most of the upper melt zone is prob- closely with the Sudbury event: 1850 ± 1 Ma, based on the ably ejected, anyway; see Fig. 6). Major enhancement of dis- same technique (Krogh et al., 1984). The Sudbury event pre- persal from a melt zone many tens of kilometers deep, as the sumably enhanced (and redirected) Penokean magmatism, but melt zones at Chicxulub and Sudbury putatively were (Fig. 3), it probably was not the primary cause, because the orogenic would require a thickness of volatile-rich sediments greater activity commenced well before 1850 Ma (Sims et al., 1989) than roughly 10 km. The Chicxulub region features a relatively and was concentrated hundreds of kilometers west of Sudbury thick pile of carbonates and anhydrites, but these sediments (Clifford, 1990). Davidson et al. (1992) have even argued that give way to basement granite and schist at depths of typically Penokean magmatism did not extend into southern Ontario, but 2.1 to 3.2 km (Lopez Ramos, 1975). Even if sediments were Card (1992) has critiqued their interpretation. piled >10 km thick, H2O would probably not contribute signif- During orogeny, the regional near-surface dT/dP is icantly to melt dispersal from a Chicxulub/Sudbury sized– enhanced to as much as three times a normal continental geo- transient crater. Sediment porosity (i.e., free water content) typ- therm, that is, to roughly 30 to 40 K/km instead of roughly ically reduces to 4% at 5-km depth and 0.3% at 10-km depth 10 to 15 K/km (Turner, 1968) (a further slight enhancement to × (Moore, 1989). Moreover, solubility of H2O in silicate melts is the Sudbury geotherm could be expected from the ~1.44 roughly proportional to P0.5, so that by 5-km depth the solubil- higher rate of radiogenic heat production at 1850 Ma in com- ity of H2O in andesitic melt is already ~5 wt% (Holloway and parison to the 65-Ma age of Chicxulub). An orogenic geotherm Blanck, 1994). Solubilities of CO2 and (at least under reducing could easily bring most of a Sudbury-sized impact melting zone conditions) SO2 are not so sensitive to P (Holloway and (more than half deeper than 20 to 30 km, based on the nominal Blanck, 1994; Carroll and Webster, 1994). models) to a state of incipient melting—before the impact. The Mega-impact melt petrology (Chicxulub, Sudbury, and the Moon) 119 latent heat of silicate rock melting is only ~20% of the heat and yet the Karoo magmas appear from nonisotopic geochemi- required to melt starting from a near-surface T of the order 0°C cal evidence not to have assimilated large proportions of crust (Fig. 8). Assuming the orogenic geotherm has not already (Cox, 1983). Norman (1994a) interprets the Os isotopic evi- induced pre-impact melting but has warmed the melting zone dence as suggesting endogenous derivation for most of the SIC. (average T) to, say, 800°C instead of the 300°C associated with Even if formed by “pure” impact melting, assuming the melting a more normally cool geotherm, the same heat input that yields zone was as deep as implied by the transient crater diameter x km3 of melt for the cool geotherm will yield 1.8x km3 for the estimates (120 to 140 km) of Deutsch and Grieve (1994), the orogenic geotherm. SIC should be regarded as somewhat anomalous. Without prior The principal effects of a higher melting/displacement warming of the deep crust by the Penokean Orogeny, both the ratio have been described in the section “Importance of the extent of regional melting and the extent of fractional crystal- Melting/Displacement Ratio.” In addition, increasing m/d, for lization of the impact magma would have been substantially constant crater/basin size, increases average depth provenance reduced. of the melt. If impact melt volume is truly as large for a 240-km basin as estimated here (Fig. 3), then considering the further The ancient Moon enhancement associated with an orogenic terrain, it seems inevitable that mantle-derived magma contributed to the SIC— In terrestrial multiring basin studies (e.g., Sharpton et al., although presumably almost exclusively to its lower, norite por- 1993; Deutsch and Grieve, 1994; and nearly all of our own dis- tion—as suggested by Chai and Eckstrand (1993). cussion to this point), the transient crater diameter is generally Recent interpretations of the Sudbury Igneous Complex as assumed to be roughly half of the D of the outermost prominent nearly pure impact melt may have gone too far. Some field ring; that is, a Croft (1985) (or Chyba, 1991) type model is studies (e.g., Cowan and Schwerdtner, 1992) suggest that the applied, assuming the outermost prominent ring is analogous to emplacement of the SIC was a prolonged process. Chai and the rim of a smaller crater. Extending this approach to the larger Eckstrand (1993) find difficulty modeling the distribution of lunar multiring basins, such as South Pole Aitken (D ~ incompatible elements within the SIC under a single-magma 2,500 km, implying Dtc ~ 1,170 km) and the dubious “Procel- hypothesis. In terms of the isotopic constraints, showing that larum” basin (D ~ 3,200 km, implying Dtc ~ 1,450 km) (regard- the SIC is not mostly mantle derived is hardly the same as ing Procellarum, see Zuber et al., 1994), results in some showing that no mantle component whatsoever is present. Even remarkable implications. the former conclusion is only suggested, not required, by the In impacts with Dtc more than roughly five times the thick- ε ε Sr and Nd evidence. Hawkesworth et al. (1984) noted that the ness of the crust, the crustal portion of the transient crater is voluminous Karoo basaltic flows and dikes of southern Africa largely ejected. For lunar impacts with Dtc greater than about ε ε have Sr and Nd remarkably similar to the range for the SIC, 300 km, the melt that escapes ejection (and thus is positioned to aggregate into a sheetlike central mass) becomes increasingly rich in matter of mantle derivation. The mantle fraction can be calculated as a function of Dtc and the assumed geometries of the ejection and melting zones (Fig. 9). Unless the melting zone is almost perfectly hemispherical in shape, these calculations indicate that in any lunar basin with Dtc >> 400 km (i.e., final D >> 720 km), the main mass of melt is >50% of mantle origin; in the cases of Imbrium (Dtc ~ 600 km) and South Pole Aitken, most likely about 85% and 99%, respectively. Of course, this initial melt will quickly become contaminated with crustal (but mostly unmelted) debris through collapse of the walls of the transient crater. Still, a central melt aggregation of preponder- antly mantle derivation is fundamentally different from one of mainly crustal provenance. Petrologic evidence suggests that the earliest lunar crust formed by flotation of plagioclase-rich cumulates over a Moon- wide “ocean” of extraordinarily FeO-rich magma, with molar Figure 8. In large-scale impacts where the target crust has been pre- Mg/(Mg + Fe) ~ 0.4 (Warren, 1990). At least initially, therefore, warmed by orogeny, as at Sudbury, or by primordial global heating, the uppermost lunar mantle was probably extremely FeO rich, as on the early Moon, impact melt may contain mainly endogenous by terrestrial standards. Models of mare basalt genesis also (non-impact-derived) heat. Specific heat is assumed to be 1200 J kg–1 K–1 and latent heat (modeled as a function of liquidus T) is assumed to indicate a generally FeO-rich (and locally also TiO2-rich) upper be 3.35 × 105 J kg–1 for terrestrial impact melting and 4 × 105 J kg–1 mantle (e.g., Taylor, 1982). An impact melt large enough to be for lunar impact melting. preponderantly composed of such material would almost cer- 120 P. H. Warren and Others

modest contribution to the early melting that drove crust/mantle differentiation. For example, the total melt formed in a South Pole Aitken–sized event is nominally (assuming Dtc = 1,170 km) 0.3 vol% of the lunar mantle. However, all the next 10 smaller basins combined (Imbrium included) generated only 0.54 times as much melt as South Pole Aitken alone. The cumulative effect of many giant impacts, closely spaced in time, would begin to take on many of the characteris- tics that are normally associated with endogenous (nonimpact) melting. By all accounts, the Moon’s crust formed so quickly after origin of the Solar System (e.g., Taylor, 1982) that the early crust, moonwide, must have been simultaneously at or very near the solidus. It was also probably insulated by a several-kilometers-thick layer of vacuous-porous impact rubble (megaregolith). Under these circumstances, cooling would have been remarkably slow. For example, models by Warren et al. (1991) suggest that T did not fall below 950°C at a depth of Figure 9. Mantle vs. crustal provenance of materials involved in lunar 50 km until 300 to 500 m.y. after crystallization from the multiring basin formation, calculated analogously to Figure 6, with magma ocean. If the average preimpact temperature of the melting/displacement estimated from equation (1). Solid curves assume depth of maximum excavation = 0.1 D (as in Fig. 6); dashed melted zone is greater than ~600 to 700°C (depending upon liq- tc uidus T, and thus composition), then more than 50% of the liq- lines assume 0.083 Dtc. Crust/mantle boundary is assumed uniform at the global average depth of 64 km (Zuber et al., 1994). Models (Croft, uidus melt’s heat is endogenous to the planet rather than added 1985; Chyba, 1991) suggest that lunar transient craters in the 400 to by the impact (Fig. 8). 1450 km diameter range collapse into final structures with diameters Together, Figures 8 and 9 suggest that any 1,000-km-scale of 720 to 3,200 km. impact basins formed much earlier than 4.0 Ga would have pro- duced central magmas so dominated by mantle material, and by endogenous heat, that the normally obvious distinction between tainly be denser than the anorthositic lunar crust yet strongly impact melt and endogenous magma becomes fuzzy and even buoyant relative to unmelted mantle of the same composition. potentially misleading. On the earliest Moon, whatever new Such an impact melt would probably tend to spread into a melts were forming by impacts were merely enlarging an broad, thin zone of melt sandwiched between lowermost crust already global magma ocean. As the magma ocean era gave and uppermost unmelted mantle. Eventually, by precipitation of way to the era of Mg-suite intrusives (4.5 to 4.2 Ga; e.g., War- mafic cumulates, it would solidify into a new zone of lower ren et al., 1991), big impacts may have increasingly influenced crust plus (preponderantly) uppermost mantle. Assuming that the siting and timing of magmatism, but the heat that drove the crust/mantle differentiation preceded this cycle, little net differ- magmatism was primarily a holdover from the magmasphere. entiation would probably be achieved. Most of the crust in the As the Moon cooled, big impacts kept occurring and possibly center of the basin would consist of unmelted rubble emplaced even increased in frequency at ~ 3.9 Ga (Ryder, 1990), but by by lateral collapse of the transient crater. The net effect would then the era of volumetrically significant crustal genesis was be a region of thinned crust, probably with enrichments of long past. incompatible elements concentrated from a broad region of the To the degree that melt plays a key role in formation of upper mantle toward where the latest crystallization of the melt basin rings (Spray and Thompson, 1995; cf. Melosh, 1995), occurs, directly under the thin-crusted, yet abnormally hot, even the final size of a multiring structure may be largely a basin (which thus acquires enhanced potential for subsequent function of the T (and other properties) of the target terrain basaltic volcanism). before the impact. Both the average preimpact T (on a still- A more important question concerns impact melt differenti- warm early Moon) and the bulk composition (Fig. 9) of the ation when crust/mantle differentiation was still far from com- future melt zone are profoundly different for events with plete. Melts associated with lunar basins with D << 1,000 km Dtc >> 300 km. Strom and Neukum’s (1988) surfeit of “craters” would have little tendency to differentiate, because of their low with nominal D ~ 800 km may be an artifact of effectively over- melting/displacement ratios and unfavorable melt/crust density estimating Dtc for multiring basins (by regarding the D of the ratios. Most known basins with D ~ 1,000 km are thought to outermost prominent ring as analogous to the final D of smaller have formed roughly 600 m.y. after the main (4.5 to 4.4 Ga) craters and peak-ring basins). The “nominal” models discussed phase of lunar crust formation (Ryder, 1990), but at least in prin- in this chapter are subject to the same caveat. ciple many older basins may have been obliterated by ongoing In the South Pole Aitken event, assuming Dtc was the bombardment. Individually, each such impact would make a “nominal” 1,170 km, mantle material composed a significant Mega-impact melt petrology (Chicxulub, Sudbury, and the Moon) 121 proportion of the total ejecta (roughly 30 vol%) and an even influences (1) the proportion of suspended clastic debris in the higher proportion (roughly 45 vol%) of the melted component melt, (2) the average T of these clasts (which in any event are of the ejecta (Fig. 9). Melt (of combined mantle + crust deriva- much colder than, and thus act to chill, the melt), and (3) the tion) also represents a large fraction, roughly one-third, of the proportion of the melt that is disseminated by ejection from the total ejecta from such a high melting/displacement (m/d) im- transient crater. Our proposed calibrations for these shifts are pact (Fig. 6). Thus, the megaregolith in regions close to the very approximate, owing to uncertainties regarding the shape of basin rim should contain high proportions of distinctively the melting zone, the size/shape of the ejection zone in relation mantle-rich impact melt. Ponds of such material might be ten- to the transient crater, and the manner in which modification tatively detected through analysis of Clementine data, but a rig- (collapse) of the transient crater mingles clastic debris with the orous test of this hypothesis would require petrologic study of impact melt. Nonetheless, the effects are clearly important, and samples (e.g., impact melt glasses in a regolith sample) from through them (primarily (1)), m/d strongly influences the poten- the South Pole Aitken region. The mantle component should be tial for an impact melt to undergo fractional crystallization. even more prominent in impact melt from the Procellarum In most lunar impacts, differentiation of the impact melt is region, assuming that the proposed Procellarum basin truly had hampered by systematically lower m/d compared to terrestrial Dtc ~ 1,450 km. Roughly 40 vol% of the melt formed in such a craters of similar size, and by the comparatively high density of high m/d impact is probably ejected (Fig. 6), and the total vol- typical impact melts. However, in a few of the largest impacts, ume of melt (“nominal” Dtc model) is 2.3 times the volume most of the unejected melt forms in the upper mantle, where it formed in all of the next 10 smaller basins, including South probably remains while crystallizing into a series of mafic Pole Aitken, combined. Thus, most of the impact melt splashed cumulates essentially similar to the preimpact upper mantle. On into the western nearside megaregolith should be a distinctively the earliest Moon (the “magma ocean” era and the first few mantle-rich (roughly 50%—Fig. 9) variety formed and ejected hundred million years thereafter), T in the upper mantle was so in this one impact. Impact melt–derived samples from the west- high that episodes of large-scale impact melting must have been ern Apollo sites should be reexamined with this possibility in practically indistinguishable from pulses of enhanced endogen- mind, but it seems more likely that either the “nominal” multi- ous magmatism. If the putative Procellarum basin truly formed ring basin Dtc model, or the Procellarum impact hypothesis with a transient crater diameter of ~1,450 km, most of the itself, is incorrect. impact melt–derived rocks in the western nearside megarego- lith should be a distinctively mantle-rich (roughly 50%) variety CONCLUSIONS formed and ejected in this one impact. We urge international support for deep drilling near the cen- Compared to the granophyre that forms the upper one-third ter of the Chicxulub structure and that the South Pole Aitken of the Sudbury Igneous Complex, available melt products from region be given highest priority in future lunar exploration. the Chicxulub Basin are consistently more fine grained, and Improved constraints on the impact melts within these two as yet their compositions are more andesitic (i.e., less differentiated poorly studied basins would clarify the potentially crucial role of from bulk continental crust). The origin of these differences is impact melting in early planetary and lunar differentiation. unclear, but the simplest explanation would be that the Sudbury impact featured significantly higher melting/displacement, in ACKNOWLEDGMENTS part (if not wholly) because the Sudbury region had been previ- ously warmed by the Penokean Orogeny. Possibly the available We thank Brian Stewart and J. Manual Grajales-Nishimura Chicxulub impact melt samples are more analogous to the Sud- for helpful discussion, John Christie for petrographic advice, bury Onaping Formation impact breccia layer (in which case and M. Norman and I. Ridley for constructive reviews of a the deeper main mass of Chicxulub impact magma has not yet poorly organized initial manuscript. This research was sup- been sampled), but the Chicxulub samples are melt rich (clast ported by NASA grants NAGW-3808 (to P. H. Warren, at Los poor) compared to most of the Onaping and SiO2 poor com- Angeles) and NAGW-3008 (to W. Alvarez, at Berkeley). pared to the more melt rich parts of the Onaping. If the Chicxu- lub impact magma initially formed with a composition similar REFERENCES CITED to the bulk SIC (which is very similar to bulk continental crust), the Chicxulub samples show little effect of the fractional crys- Alfvén, H., and Arrhenius, G., 1976, Evolution of the Solar System: Washing- tallization that putatively produced the gross vertical layering ton, D.C., NASA, 599 p. of the SIC. Ashwal, L. D., 1993, Anorthosites: Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 422 p. Impact melt crystallization behavior is probably correlated Avermann, M., and Brockmeyer, P., 1992, The Onaping Formation of the Sud- with the size of the impact structure, but the most important bury Structure (Canada): An example of allochthonous impact breccias: Tectonophysics, v. 216, p. 227–234. variable, the melting/displacement (m/d) ratio, is not a simple Avermann, M., and eight others, 1992, Sudbury Project (University of Mün- function of structure diameter. Planetary g and preimpact T of ster—Ontario Geological Survey): (1) Summary of results—An the melting zone both strongly influence m/d, which in turn updated impact model (abstract), in Papers Presented to the Interna- 122 P. H. Warren and Others

tional Conference on Large Meteorite Impacts and Planetary Evolution: origin of the Moon: Proceedings, Lunar and Planetary Science Confer- Houston, Lunar and Planetary Institute Contribution 790, p. 5–6. ence, 9th, p. 1087–1102. Bottinga, Y., and Weill, D. F., 1970, Densities of liquid silicate systems calcu- Deutsch, A., and Grieve, R. A. F., 1994, The Sudbury Structure: Constraints on lated from partial molar volumes of oxide components: American Jour- its genesis from Lithoprobe results: Geophysical Research Letters, nal of Science, v. 269, p. 169–182. v. 21, p. 963–966. Bottinga, Y., and Weill, D. F., 1972, The viscosity of magmatic silicate liquids: A Deutsch, A., Lakomy, R., and Buhl, D., 1989, Strontium- and neodymium- model for calculation: American Journal of Science, v. 272, p. 438–475. isotopic characteristics of a heterolithic breccia in the basement of the Bowen, N. L., 1928, The evolution of the igneous rocks: Princeton, Princeton Sudbury impact structure: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 93, University Press, 334 p. p. 359–370. Brocoum, S. J., and Dalziel, I. W. D., 1974, The Sudbury Basin, the Southern Deutsch, A., Brockmeyer, P., and Buhl, D., 1990, Sudbury again: New and old Province, the Grenville Front, and the Penokean Orogeny: Geological isotope data [abs.]: Lunar and Planetary Science, v. 21, p. 282–283. Society of America Bulletin, v. 85, p. 1571–1580. Faggart, B. E., Jr., Basu, A. R., and Tatsumoto, M., 1985, Origin of the Sudbury Card, K. D., 1992, Circa 1.75 Ga ages for plutonic rocks from the Southern complex by meteoritic impact: Neodymium isotopic evidence: Science, Province and adjacent Grenville Province: What is the expression of the v. 230, p. 436–439. Penokean Orogeny?: Discussion: Radiogenic Age and Isotopic Studies: French, B. M., and Nielsen, R. L., 1990, Vredefort Bronzite Granophyre: Report 6, Geological Survey of Canada, Paper 92-2, p. 227–228. Chemical evidence for origin as a meteorite impact melt: Tectono- Carmichael, I. S. E., Turner, F. J., and Verhoogen, J., 1974, Igneous petrology: physics, v. 171, p. 119–138. New York, McGraw-Hill, 739 p. Gibbins, W. A., and McNutt, R. H., 1975, The age of the Sudbury Nickel Irrup- Carroll, M. R., and Webster, J. D., 1994, Solubilities of sulfur, noble gases, tive and the Murray granite: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 12, nitrogen, chlorine, and fluorine in magmas, in Carroll, M. R., and p. 1970–1989. Holloway, J. R., eds., Volatiles in magmas: Reviews in Mineralogy, Grieve, R. A. F., and Cintala, M. J., 1992, An analysis of differential impact v. 30, p. 231–279. melt-crater scaling and implications for the terrestrial record: Meteorit- Cedillo-Pardo, E., Grajales N., J. M., Margolis, S. V., and Alvarez, W., 1992, ics, v. 27, p. 526–538. Petrography and chemistry of Chicxulub melt rocks, Yucatan Peninsula, Grieve, R. A. F., and Floran, R. J., 1978, Manicouagan impact melt, Quebec. 2: Mexico: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 24, Chemical interactions with basement and formational processes: Jour- p. A333. nal of Geophysical Research, v. 83, p. 2761–2771. Chai, G., and Eckstrand, O. R., 1993, Origin of the Sudbury Igneous Complex, Grieve, R. A. F., Stöffler, D., and Deutsch, A., 1991, The Sudbury Structure: Ontario—differentiate of two separate magmas: Geological Survey of Controversial or misunderstood?: Journal of Geophysical Research, Canada, Current Research, Part E, Paper 93-1E, p. 219-230. v. 96, p. 22753–22764. Chen, G., Tyburczy, J. A., and Ahrens, T. J., 1994, Shock-induced devolatiliza- Haines, E. L., and Metzger, A. E., 1980, Lunar highland crustal models based tion of calcium sulfate and implications for K-T extinctions: Earth and on iron concentrations: Isostasy and center-of-mass displacement: Pro- Planetary Science Letters, v. 128, p. 615–628. ceedings, Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 11th, p. 689–718. Christian, R. P., Berman, S., Dwornik, E. J., Rose, H. J., Jr., and Schnepfe, Hawkesworth, C. J., Marsh, J S., Duncan, A. R., Erlank, A. J., and Norry, M. J., M. M., 1976, Composition of some Apollo 14, 15, and 16 lunar breccias 1984, The role of continental lithosphere in the generation of the Karoo and two Apollo 15 fines [abs.]: Lunar and Planetary Science, v. 7, volcanic rocks: Evidence from combined Nd- and Sr-isotope studies: p. 138–140. Special Publications of the Geological Society of South Africa, v. 13, Chyba, C. F., 1991, Terrestrial mantle siderophiles and the lunar impact record: p. 341–354. Icarus, v. 92, p. 217–233. Hildebrand, A. R., Penfield, G. T., Kring, D. A., Pilkington, M., Camargo Z., Clifford, P. M., 1990, Mid-Proterozoic deformational and intrusive events along A., Jacobsen, S. B., and Boynton, W. V., 1991, Chicxulub crater: A pos- the Grenville Front in the Sudbury-Killarney Area, Ontario, and their sible Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary impact crater on the Yucatán Penin- implications, in Gower, C. F., Rivers, T., and Ryan, B., eds., Mid- sula, Mexico: Geology, v. 19, p. 867–871. Proterozoic Laurentia-Baltica: Ottawa, Geological Society of Canada Hildebrand, A. R., Pilkington, M., Connors M., Ortiz-Aleman, C., and Chavez, Special Paper 38, p. 335–350. R. E., 1995, Chicxulub crater size and structure as revealed by horizon- Collins, W. H., 1934, The life-history of the Sudbury Nickel Irruptive (1): Petro- tal Bouger gravity gradients and cenote distribution [abs.]: Lunar and genesis: Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada, v. 28, p. 123–177. Planetary Science, v. 26, p. 603–604. Condie, K. C., 1982, Plate tectonics and crustal evolution (second edition): Holloway, J. R., and Blanck, J. G., 1994, Application of experimental results to New York, Pergamon, 310 p. C-O-H species in natural melts, in Carroll, M. R., and Holloway, J. R., Cowan, E. J., and Schwerdtner, W. M., 1992, Intrusive origin of the Sudbury eds., Volatiles in magmas: Reviews in Mineralogy, v. 30, p. 187–230. Igneous complex: Structural and sedimentological evidence (abstract), Irvine, T. N., 1982, Terminology for layered intrusions: Journal of Petrology, in Papers Presented to the International Conference on Large Meteorite v. 23, p. 127–162. Impacts and Planetary Evolution: Houston, Lunar and Planetary Insti- Kieffer, S. W., and Simonds, C. H., 1980, The role of volatiles and lithology in tute (Contribution no. 790), p. 17–18. the impact cratering process: Reviews of Geophysics and Space Physics, Cox, K. G., 1983, The Karoo province of southern Africa: Origin of trace ele- v. 18, p. 143–181. ment enrichment patterns, in Hawkesworth, C. J., and Norry, M. J., eds., Kring, D. A., and Boynton, W. V., 1992, Petrogenesis of an augite-bearing melt Continental basalts and mantle xenoliths: Nantwich, England, Shiva, rock in the Chicxulub structure and its relationship to K/T impact p. 139–157. spherules in Haiti: Nature, v. 358, p. 141–144. Croft, S. K., 1985, The scaling of complex craters: Proceedings, Lunar and Krogh, T. E., Davis, D. W., and Corfu, F., 1984, Precise U-Pb zircon and bad- Planetary Science Conference, 15th, p. C828–C842. delyite ages for the Sudbury area, in Pye, E. G., Naldrett, A. J., and Gib- Davidson, A., van Breemen, O., and Sullivan, R. W., 1992, Circa 1.75 Ga ages lin, P. E., eds., The geology and ore deposits of the Sudbury Structure: for plutonic rocks from the Southern Province and adjacent Grenville Toronto, Ontario Geological Survey Special Volume 1, p. 431–446. Province: What is the expression of the Penokean orogeny? in Radi- Kuo, H. Y., and Crocket, J. H., 1979, Rare earth elements in the Sudbury Nickel ogenic Age and Isotopic Studies: Report 6, Geological Survey of Irruptive: Comparison with layered gabbros and implications for Nickel Canada Paper 92-2, p. 107–118. Irruptive genesis: Economic Geology, v. 74, p. 590–605.

Delano, J. W., and Ringwood, A. E., 1978, Siderophile elements in the lunar Lange, R. L., 1994, The effect of H2O, CO2 and F on the density and viscosity highlands: Nature of the indigenous component and implications for the of silicate liquids, in Carroll, M. R., and Holloway, J. R., eds., Volatiles Mega-impact melt petrology (Chicxulub, Sudbury, and the Moon) 123

in magmas: Washington, D.C., Mineralogical Society of America, Phinney, W. C., and Simonds, C. H., 1977, Dynamical implications of the p. 331–369. petrology and distribution of impact melt rocks, in Roddy, D. J., Pepin, Langenhorst, F., 1994, Shock experiments on pre-heated a- and b-quartz. R. O., and Merrill, R. B., eds., Impact and explosion cratering: New II. X-ray and TEM investigations: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, York, Pergamon, p. 771–790. v. 128, p. 683–698. Quezada Muñeton, J. M., Marín, L. E., Sharpton, V. L., Ryder, G., and Schu- Lindstrom, M. M., Marvin, U. B., Holmberg, B. B., and Mittlefehldt, D. W., raytz, B. C., 1992, The Chicxulub impact structure: Shock deformation 1990, Apollo 15 KREEP-poor impact melts: Proceedings, Lunar and and target composition [abs.]: Lunar and Planetary Science, v. 23, Planetary Science Conference, 20th, p. 77–90. p. 1121–1122. Lopez Ramos, E., 1975, Geological summary of the Yucatan Peninsula, in Raikes, S. A., and Ahrens, T. J., 1979, Post-shock temperatures in minerals: Geo- Nairn, A. E. M., and Stehli, F. G., eds., The ocean basins and margins: physical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, v. 58, p. 717–747. Volume 3: The Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean: New York, Plenum, Rhodes, J. M., Rodgers, K. V., Shih, C., Bansal, B. M., Nyquist, L. E., Wies- p. 257–282. mann, H., and Hubbard, N. J., 1974, The relationships between geology Marsh, B. D., 1981, On the crystallinity, probability of occurrence, and rheol- and soil chemistry at the Apollo 17 landing site: Proceedings, Lunar ogy of lava and magma: Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, Science Conference, 5th, p. 1097–1117. v. 78, p. 85–98. Ryder, G., 1990, Lunar samples, lunar accretion and the early bombardment of McGrath, P. H., and Broome, H. J., 1994, A gravity model for the Sudbury the Moon: Eos, v. 71, p. 313–323. Structure along the Lithoprobe seismic line: Geophysical Research Let- Schuraytz, B. C., Sharpton, V. L., and Marín, L. E., 1994, Petrology of impact- ters, v. 21, p. 955–958. melt rocks at the Chicxulub multiring basin, Yucatán, Mexico: Geology, McKinley, J. P., Taylor, G. J., Keil, K., Ma, M. -S., and Schmitt, R. A., 1984, v. 22, p. 868–872. Apollo 16: Impact melt sheets, contrasting nature of the Cayley Plains Sharpton, V. L., Dalrymple, G. B., Marín, L. E., Schuraytz, B. C., and Urrutia- and Descartes Mountains, and geologic history: Proceedings, Lunar and Fucugauchi, J., 1992, New links between the Chicxulub impact struc- Planetary Science Conference, 14th, p. B513–B524. ture and the Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary: Nature, v. 359, p. 819–821. Meissner, R., 1986, The continental crust: A geophysical approach: Orlando, Sharpton, V. L., and 9 others, 1993, Chicxulub multiring impact basin: Size and Academic, 426 p. other characteristics derived from gravity analysis: Science, v. 261, Melosh, H. J., 1989, Impact cratering: A geologic process: New York, Oxford p. 1564–1567. University Press, 245 p. Shaw, H. R., 1972, Viscosities of magmatic silicate liquids: An empirical Melosh, H. J., 1995, Under the ringed basins: Nature, v. 373, p. 104–105. method of prediction: American Journal of Science, v. 272, p. 870–893. Meyerhoff, A. A., Lyons, J. B., and Officer, C. B., 1994, Chicxulub Structure: A Simonds, C. H., Warner, J. L., Phinney, W. C., and McGee, P. E., 1976, Thermal volcanic sequence of Late Cretaceous age: Geology, v. 22, p. 3–4. model for impact breccia lithification: Manicouagan and the Moon: Moore, C. H., 1989, Carbonate diagenesis and porosity: Amsterdam, Elsevier, Proceedings, Lunar Science Conference, 7th, p. 2509–2528. 338 p. Sims, P. K., Van Schmus, W. R., Schulz, K. J., and Peterman, Z. E., 1989, Muir, T. L., and Peredery, W. V., 1984, The Onaping Formation, in Pye, E. G., Tectono-stratigraphic evolution of the Early Proterozoic Wisconsin Naldrett, A. J., and Giblin, P. E., eds., The geology and ore deposits of magmatic terranes of the Penokean Orogen: Canadian Journal of Earth the Sudbury Structure: Toronto, Ontario Geological Survey Special Vol- Sciences, v. 26, p. 2145–2158. ume 1, p. 139–199. Spray, J. G., and Thompson, L. M., 1995, Friction melt distribution in a multi- Naldrett, A. J., and Hewins, R. H., 1984, The Main Mass of the Sudbury ring impact basin: Nature, v. 373, p. 130–132. Igneous Complex, in Pye, E. G., Naldrett, A. J., and Giblin, P. E., eds., Spudis, P. D., 1992, Basaltic impact melts in the Apollo collections: How many The geology and ore deposits of the Sudbury Structure: Toronto, impacts and which events are recorded? [abs.], in Ryder, G., Schmitt, Ontario Geological Survey Special Volume 1, p. 235–251. H. H., and Spudis, P. D., eds., Workshop on the geology of the Naldrett, A. J., Rao, B. V., and Evensen, N. M., 1986, Contamination at Sud- Apollo 17 landing site: Houston, Lunar and Planetary Institute Techni- bury and its role in ore formation, in Gallagher, M. J., Ixer, R. A., Neary, cal Report Number 92-09, p. 55–57. C. R., and Prichard, H. M., eds., Metallogeny of basic and ultrabasic Spudis, P. D., and Ryder, G., 1981, Apollo 17 impact melts and their relation to rocks: London, Institute of Mining Metallurgy, p. 75–91. the Serenitatis basin, in Schultz, P. H., and Merrill, R. B., eds., Multi- Newton, R. C., 1987, Thermodynamic analysis of phase equilibria in simple ring basins: New York, Pergamon, p. 133–148. mineral systems, in Carmichael, I. S. E., and Eugster, H. P., eds., Ther- Stebbins, J. F., Carmichael, I. S. E., and Moret, L. K., 1984, Heat capacities and modynamic Modeling of Geological Materials: Minerals, fluids and entropies of silicate liquids and glasses: Contributions to Mineralogy melts: Reviews in Mineralogy, v. 17, p. 1–33. and Petrology, v. 86, p. 131–148. Norman, M. D., 1994a, Sudbury Igneous Complex: Evidence favoring endoge- Strom, R. G., and Neukum, G., 1988, The cratering record on Mercury and the nous magma rather than impact melt (abstract): Lunar and Planetary origin of impacting objects, in Vilas, F., Chapman, C. R., and Matthews, Science, v. 25, p. 1007–1008. M. S., eds., Mercury: Tuscon, University of Arizona Press, p. 336–373. Norman, M. D., 1994b, Sudbury Igneous Complex: Impact melt or endogenous Swisher, C. C. III, and 11 others, 1992, Coeval 40Ar-39Ar ages of 65.0 million magma? Implications for lunar crustal evolution, in Dressler, B. O., years ago from Chicxulub crater melt rock and Cretaceous-Tertiary Grieve, R. A. F., and Sharpton, V. L., eds., Large meteorite impacts and boundary tektites: Science, v. 257, p. 954–958. planetary evolution: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America Taylor, S. R., 1982, Planetary science: A lunar perspective: Houston, Lunar and Special Paper 293, p. 331–341. Planetary Institute, 512 p. Onorato, P. I. K., Uhlmann, D. R., and Simonds, C. H., 1978, The thermal his- Therriault, A. M., Reid, A. M., and Reimold, W. U., 1993, Original size of the tory of the Manicouagan impact melt sheet, Quebec: Journal of Geo- Vredefort structure, South Africa (abstract): Lunar and Planetary Sci- physical Research, v. 83, p. 2789–2798. ence, v. 24, p. 1419–1420. Penfield, G. T., and Camargo Z., A., 1981, Definition of a major igneous zone Tonks, W. B., and Melosh, H. J., 1993, Core formation by giant impacts: Con- in the central Yucatan platform with aeromagnetics and gravity [abs.]: ditions for impact melt region formation [abs.]: Lunar and Planetary 51st Annual International Meeting, Society of Exploration Geophysi- Science, v. 24, p. 1435–1436. cists, v. 51, p. 38–39. Turcotte, D. L., and Schubert, G., 1982, Geodynamics: Applications of contin- Persikov, E. S., Bukhtiyarov, P. G., and Kalinicheva, T. V., 1987, Effects of uum physics to geological problems: New York, Wiley, 450 p. composition, temperature, and pressure on magma fluidity: Geokhi- Turner, F. G., 1968, Metamorphic petrology: New York, McGraw-Hill, 403 p. miya, v. 3, p. 483–498. Wadsworth, W. J., 1985, Terminology of postcumulus processes and products in 124 P. H. Warren and Others

the Rhum layered intrusion: Geological Magazine, v. 122, p. 549–554. Warren, P. H., Haack, H., and Rasmussen, K. L., 1991, Megaregolith insulation Wager, L. R., and Brown, G. M., 1967, Layered igneous rocks: San Francisco, and the duration of cooling to isotopic closure within differentiated Freeman, 588 p. asteroids and the Moon: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 96, Walker, R. J., Morgan, J. W., Naldrett, A. J., Li, C., and Fassett, J. D., 1991, p. 5909–5923. Re-Os isotope systematics of Ni-Cu sulfide ores, Sudbury Igneous Wetherill, G. W., 1981, Nature and origin of basin-forming projectiles, in Complex, Ontario: Evidence for a major crustal component: Earth and Schultz, P. H., and Merrill, R. B., eds., Multi-ring basins: New York, Planetary Science Letters, v. 105, p. 416–429. Pergamon, p. 1–18. Warner, J. L., Simonds, C. H., and Phinney, W. C., 1974, Impact-induced frac- Wilhelms, D. E., 1987, The geologic history of the Moon: U.S. Geological Sur- tionation in the olunar highlands: Proceedings, Lunar Science Confer- vey Professional Paper 1348, 302 p. ence, 5th, p. 379–398. Wood, J. A., 1975, Lunar petrogenesis in a well-stirred magma ocean: Pro- Warren, P. H., 1990, Lunar anorthosites and the magma-ocean plagioclase- ceedings, Lunar Science Conference, 6th, p. 1087–1102. flotation hypothesis: Importance of FeO enrichment in the parent Zuber, M. T., Smith, D. E., Lemoine, F. G., and Neumann, G. A., 1994, The magma: American Mineralogist, v. 75, p. 46–58. shape and internal structure of the Moon from the Clementine mission: Warren, p. H., and Rasmussen, K. L., 1987, Megaregolith insulation, internal Science, v. 266, p. 1839–1843. temperatures, and bulk uranium content of the Moon: Journal of Geo- physical Research, v. 92, p. 3453-3465. MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY SEPTEMBER 14, 1995

Printed in U.S.A.