View
2.979
Download
1
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
DOI: 10.1126/science.1223932, 939 (2012);338 Science
et al.John A. TardunoEvidence for a Dynamo in the Main Group Pallasite Parent Body
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only.
clicking here.colleagues, clients, or customers by , you can order high-quality copies for yourIf you wish to distribute this article to others
here.following the guidelines
can be obtained byPermission to republish or repurpose articles or portions of articles
): November 16, 2012 www.sciencemag.org (this information is current as of
The following resources related to this article are available online at
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/338/6109/939.full.htmlversion of this article at:
including high-resolution figures, can be found in the onlineUpdated information and services,
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/suppl/2012/11/15/338.6109.939.DC1.html can be found at: Supporting Online Material
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/338/6109/939.full.html#relatedfound at:
can berelated to this article A list of selected additional articles on the Science Web sites
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/338/6109/939.full.html#ref-list-1, 3 of which can be accessed free:cites 54 articlesThis article
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/338/6109/939.full.html#related-urls1 articles hosted by HighWire Press; see:cited by This article has been
registered trademark of AAAS. is aScience2012 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science; all rights reserved. The title
CopyrightAmerican Association for the Advancement of Science, 1200 New York Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20005. (print ISSN 0036-8075; online ISSN 1095-9203) is published weekly, except the last week in December, by theScience
on
Nov
embe
r 16
, 201
2w
ww
.sci
ence
mag
.org
Dow
nloa
ded
from
10. S. Tamura, D. C. Hurley, J. P. Wolfe, Phys. Rev. B 38,1427 (1988).
11. T. Yao, Appl. Phys. Lett. 51, 1798 (1987).12. X. Y. Yu, G. Chen, A. Verma, J. S. Smith, Appl. Phys. Lett.
67, 3554 (1995).13. W. S. Capinski et al., Phys. Rev. B 59, 8105
(1999).14. S.-M. Lee, D. G. Cahill, R. Venkatasubramanian,
Appl. Phys. Lett. 70, 2957 (1997).15. G. Chen, Phys. Rev. B 57, 14958 (1998).16. B. C. Daly, H. J. Maris, K. Imamura, S. Tamura, Phys. Rev. B
66, 024301 (2002).17. Y. K. Koh, Y. Cao, D. G. Cahill, D. Jena, Adv. Funct. Mater.
19, 610 (2009).18. E. T. Swartz, R. O. Pohl, Rev. Mod. Phys. 61, 605
(1989).19. R. Landauer, Philos. Mag. 21, 863 (1970).20. D. Li et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 83, 2934 (2003).21. P. D. Robb, A. J. Craven, Ultramicroscopy 109, 61
(2008).22. C. A. Paddock, G. L. Eesley, J. Appl. Phys. 60, 285
(1986).23. D. G. Cahill, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 75, 5119 (2004).24. A. J. Schmidt, X. Chen, G. Chen, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 79,
114902 (2008).
25. Materials and methods are available as supplementarymaterials on Science Online.
26. M. A. Afromowitz, J. Appl. Phys. 44, 1292 (1973).27. P. Hyldgaard, G. D. Mahan, Phys. Rev. B 56, 10754
(1997).28. S. Tamura, Y. Tanaka, H. J. Maris, Phys. Rev. B 60, 2627
(1999).29. E. S. Landry, A. J. H. McGaughey, Phys. Rev. B 79,
075316 (2009).30. S. Volz, J. B. Saulnier, G. Chen, P. Beauchamp,
Microelectron. J. 31, 815 (2000).31. S. Baroni, P. Giannozzi, A. Testa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58,
1861 (1987).32. D. A. Broido, M. Malorny, G. Birner, N. Mingo,
D. A. Stewart, Appl. Phys. Lett. 91, 231922 (2007).33. K. Esfarjani, G. Chen, H. T. Stokes, Phys. Rev. B 84,
085204 (2011).34. J. Garg, N. Bonini, B. Kozinsky, N. Marzari, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 106, 045901 (2011).35. J. Garg, N. Bonini, N. Marzari, Nano Lett. 11, 5135
(2011).36. S. Tamura, Phys. Rev. B 27, 858 (1983).37. P. A. Lee, D. S. Fisher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 882 (1981).38. C. Caroli, R. Combescot, P. Nozieres, D. Saint-James,
J. Phys. C Solid State Phys. 4, 916 (1971).
39. Y. Meir, N. S. Wingreen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 2512 (1992).40. G. Pernot et al., Nat. Mater. 9, 491 (2010).41. R. M. Costescu, D. G. Cahill, F. H. Fabreguette,
Z. A. Sechrist, S. M. George, Science 303, 989(2004).
42. C. Chiritescu et al., Science 315, 351 (2007).
Acknowledgments: We thank A. A. Maznev, K. A. Nelson,K. C. Collins, and J. Johnson for helpful discussions. Thismaterial is based on work supported as part of the Solid StateSolar-Thermal Energy Conversion Center (S3TEC), an EnergyFrontier Research Center funded by the U.S. Department ofEnergy, Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciencesunder award DE-SC0001299/DE-FG02-09ER46577. M.N.L. waspartially supported by the National Science FoundationGraduate Research Fellowship under grant 1122374.
Supplementary Materialswww.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/338/6109/936/DC1Materials and MethodsFigs. S1 to S4References (43–57)
4 June 2012; accepted 9 October 201210.1126/science.1225549
Evidence for a Dynamo in the MainGroup Pallasite Parent BodyJohn A. Tarduno,1,2* Rory D. Cottrell,1 Francis Nimmo,3 Julianna Hopkins,2 Julia Voronov,1Austen Erickson,1,2 Eric Blackman,2 Edward R.D. Scott,4 Robert McKinley1
Understanding the origin of pallasites, stony-iron meteorites made mainly of olivine crystalsand FeNi metal, has been a vexing problem since their discovery. Here, we show that pallasiteolivines host minute magnetic inclusions that have favorable magnetic recording properties. Ourpaleointensity measurements indicate strong paleomagnetic fields, suggesting dynamo action inthe pallasite parent body. We use these data and thermal modeling to suggest that some pallasitesformed when liquid FeNi from the core of an impactor was injected as dikes into the shallowmantle of a ~200-kilometer-radius protoplanet. The protoplanet remained intact for at leastseveral tens of millions of years after the olivine-metal mixing event.
Lord Rayleigh (Robert John Strutt) (1)noted the paradox posed by pallasite me-teorites:Olivine andmetal seemingly should
have separated into layers in their parent body.Some models, to avoid segregation, have invokedsmall metal pools throughout a parent body (2),but the putative scenario has remained in forma-tion near a core-mantle boundary (3). There are~50 known pallasite meteorites. Most have iso-topic ratios that fall near the terrestrial massfractionation line and are called “main group”pallasites (4). Olivine ranges from Fa11 to Fa20and often occurs as centimeter-sized (Fig. 1, Aand B) crystals (5–8), with a dislocation density
(9) comparable with those of unshocked terres-trial samples. The metal in main group pallasitesis Ir poor and is thought to have originated fromthe residual melt fraction of a core similar incomposition to IIIAB iron meteorites (3).
Paleomagnetism might help to distinguishbetween models for pallasite formation, but priorattempts have failed to yield interpretable data.The massive FeNi of the pallasite matrix is thelikely culprit. This metal is similar to that com-posing iron meteorites, which carries a highlyanisotropic, soft magnetization; it is notoriouslypoor as a paleomagnetic recorder (10, 11). Paleo-magnetic studies of other meteorites [for example,(12–13)], however, suggest some parent bodieshosted dynamos.Modeling suggests bodies >80 kmin radius could be in the regime of supercriticalmagnetic Reynolds numbers, in which large-scaledynamo action is possible (14, 15).
Rather than studying bulk material, we ap-plied techniques of single-silicate crystal analysis(16, 17) to an investigation of the Imilac andEsquel main group pallasites. We selected gem-like olivine subsamples ≳0.5 cm from the me-
teorite edge and several millimeters from theolivine/metal contact. Prior studies (18, 19) sug-gest that at these distances, heating effects due toatmospheric entry are negligible.
We have observed strings of large inclusions,tens of micrometers in size (Fig. 1C), in someolivines using transmitted light microscopy. Scan-ning electron microscopy (SEM) reveals isolatedand strings of much smaller inclusions (≲10 mm)(Fig. 1D) that are composed of Fe, Ni, S, and Cr(fig S3).Microprobe analyses detail submicrometer-sized, irregularly spaced FeNi particles within thesesmaller inclusions, surrounded by troilite (fig S4).These metal particles are sometimes Ni rich [~51to 58 weight percent (wt %) Ni] and are potentialstable magnetic recorders.
Olivine subsamples lacking inclusions visibleto the naked eye show pseudo-single– to single-domain magnetic hysteresis behavior (Fig. 1, Eand F). In contrast, samples with visible inclu-sions have multidomain behavior. In the formercase, we find only a slight anisotropy (Fig. 1G),and first-order reversal curves (20) fail to showsubstantial magnetic interactions (Fig. 1H). Thus,we further selected olivine subsamples lackingvisible inclusions because they can have optimalproperties for paleointensity determination (21).
Many meteorites have been exposed to mag-netic contamination during collection (13). Wetherefore first used alternating field demagne-tization, which revealed removal of magnetiza-tions after the application of low peak fields (5 to10 mT). Magnetization directions stabilized afterthis pretreatment, and it was here that we startedthermal demagnetization.We used thermal meth-ods because they best replicate the potential mag-netization acquisition process [thermoremanentmagnetization (TRM)] (21). In many meteorites,magnetic mineral alteration accompanying thermaltreatment is severe (11–13). Studies of terrestrialsamples indicate that inclusions in single-silicatecrystals are less susceptible to alteration (16, 17).
1Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Universityof Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627, USA. 2Department of Phys-ics and Astronomy, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY14627, USA. 3Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences,University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA. 4HawaiiInstitute for Geophysics and Planetology, University of Hawaii,Manoa, HI 96822, USA.
*To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail:john.tarduno@rochester.edu
www.sciencemag.org SCIENCE VOL 338 16 NOVEMBER 2012 939
REPORTS
on
Nov
embe
r 16
, 201
2w
ww
.sci
ence
mag
.org
Dow
nloa
ded
from
Low unblocking temperature magnetiza-tions (<360°C) observed from Esquel olivinelikely have a viscous origin. However, the Esquel
pallasite olivine shows a large decrease in nat-ural remanent magnetization (NRM) and a sta-ble direction between ~360° and 500°C (Fig. 2,
A and B). Only very small NRM changes areseen at higher demagnetization temperatures,between 500° and 750°C. The dominant drop
2 m
m
A
C D
B E F
G H
Fig. 1. Magnetic character of inclusions in pallasite olivine. (A and B) Esquel andImilac meteorite samples, respectively. (C) Large inclusions in olivine (transmitted lightmicroscopy). (D) String of smaller inclusions (between white arrows; SEM). (E and F)
Magnetic hysteresis curves for olivine. (G) Hysteresis parameter versus angle of measurement (16) and (H) First-order reversal curve plot (20) for Esquel olivine.Mr,remanent magnetization; Ms, saturation magnetization; Hcr, coercivity of remanence; Hc, coercivity.
Fig. 2. Paleointensity experiments on pallasite olivine. (A) Demagnetizationof NRM of Esquel olivine (black line). (B) Orthogonal vector plot of (A); red isinclination, blue is declination (orientation relative). (C) Thellier-Coe paleo-intensity data, NRM removed versus TRM gained using a 60-mT applied fieldsuggests a paleofield of 110.7 mT. (D) Demagnetization of a laboratory TotalTRM acquired in a 60-mT field [(A), red curve] suggests a paleofield of 118.8 mT
(calculated by comparing values at three temperature steps highlighted bygray boxes). (E to H) Paleointensity data as discussed above on Imilac olivineindicating paleofields of 64.9 mT (Thellier-Coe technique, 60-mT applied field)and 67.3 mT (Total TRMmethod, 30-mT applied field). (I) An oriented section ofthe Esquel meteorite with metal removed. (J to L) Associated demagnetizationresults.
16 NOVEMBER 2012 VOL 338 SCIENCE www.sciencemag.org940
REPORTS
on
Nov
embe
r 16
, 201
2w
ww
.sci
ence
mag
.org
Dow
nloa
ded
from
in NRM suggests a taenite carrier (~50 to 55wt % Ni) (21, 22), which is consistent with ourmicroprobe results. Ordering may be limited invery small taenite particles within troilite inclu-sions (23).
Thellier-Coe (23, 24) paleointensity data (Fig.2C) of a typical sample suggest that a TRM wasimparted in a paleofield of 110.7 T 5.2 mT. Tofurther examine the nature of the NRM, we im-parted a Total TRM to the sample by heating at700°C in the presence of a 60-mT field. The de-magnetization curve of the Total TRM is similarto that of the initial NRM (Fig. 2A); small dif-
ferences may indicate minor thermally inducedalteration. Demagnetization of the Total TRMallows for a second estimation of the paleofield;this yields 118.8 T 5.7 mT. Subsamples from twoadditional crystals from the same Esquel meteor-ite sample yield similar values (116.0 T 5.4 mT,109.6 T 7.0 mT, Thellier-Coe method; 115.0 T 6.9mT, 113.4 T 4.0 mT, Total TRM method). As afurther consistency test, we studied a second Esquelpallasite sample. We observed nearly identicaldemagnetization behavior, with Thellier-Coe andTotal TRM paleointensity estimates of 132.4 T5.7 mT and 134.3 T 6.1 mT, respectively, within
~15% of the values obtained from our first ex-periments (tables S1 to S4).
Olivine subsamples from the Imilac pallasiteshow similar behavior (Fig. 2, E to H). Thellier-Coe experiments on two separate samples yield67.9 T 9.2 mTand 79.3 T 7.2 mT (paleointensitiesbased on Total TRM experiments are 67.7 T 6.2and 77.7 T 2.2 mT, respectively). Total TRM ex-periments using two different applied field valuesyield consistent paleointensities (table S2), sug-gesting no applied field dependence.
The unblocking temperatures we have ob-served, viewed in the context provided by ourmicroprobe results, are inconsistent with terres-trial weathering (23). Also, our experiments dem-onstrate that the dominant magnetization is not anartifact of kamacite-taenite interaction discussedin the study of iron meteorites (10). Our paleo-intensity measurements are on unoriented olivinecrystals. In some meteorites, subsamples havebeen found to have different magnetic directions,precluding the acquisition of a TRM after themeteorite mass had assembled (11–13). In con-trast, at unblocking temperatures >360°C, we ob-served consistent directions from oriented pallasiteolivine crystals (Fig. 2, I to L).
The average field value obtained from theEsquel meteorite (122.3 T 14.4 mT, Thellier-Coemethod; 125.2 T 12.9 mT, Total TRM method) issomewhat larger than those observed on Earth’ssurface but somewhat weaker than Earth’s fieldcalculated at the core-mantle boundary (for ex-ample, the radial component was typically 200 to600 mT in 1990) (25). The average value from theImilac meteorite (73.6 T 8.1 mT, Thellier-Coemethod; 72.7 T 7.1 mT, Total TRM method) iscomparable with Earth’s surface field. These rela-tively high intensities suggest an internally gen-erated magnetic field in the pallasite parent bodybecause other sources create fields orders of mag-nitude weaker (13). We interpret these data asrecording dynamo action after the injection ofmetal into the olivine crystals. The fracture path-ways for the metal injection subsequently healed,and the inclusions cooled below the Curie tem-perature of taenite. This injection probably coin-cided with an impact creating the larger-scaleolivine-metal mixing.
The absolute age of the mixing event is un-known, but Mn-Cr systematics provide an oldestage bound of 4.558 billion years ago (26). Fission-track model ages suggest that the magnetizationwe have measured may have set in as late as 4.4to 4.2 billion years ago (27), values that are con-sistent with an early mixing event followed byslow cooling (23).
Our data thus imply that the parent bodymusthave retained a partially liquid iron core (to permita dynamo) until the pallasites cooled to ~360°C,and therefore they cannot have been too closeto the core-mantle boundary. The magnetic evi-dence is consistent with, and independent of, thediversity of main group pallasite cooling ratesthat previously have been used to argue (28)against a core-mantle boundary origin. A liquid
Fig. 3. Spherically symmetric three-layer conductive asteroid cooling model (23). (Left) Evolution oftemperature as a function of radius and time. The model consists of an insulating regolith, a silicatemantle, and a metallic core. The initial condition is 1600 K everywhere. The core remains isothermal(liquid) until it starts to solidify at 1200 K and thereafter cools conductively. The mantle cools conductivelythroughout. The 800 K and 633 K isotherms correspond to taenite diffusion recording cooling rate andthe lowest paleomagnetic unblocking temperature defining the characteristic magnetization, respectively.The horizontal dashed line indicates the core mantle boundary, and the vertical dashed line indicates thetime at which core solidification is complete. (Right) Cooling rate at 800 K as a function of distance. Thedark shaded box indicates the assumed megaregolith thickness (23). The light shaded box is the 2 to 9 Kper million years cooling rate estimate from pallasite metal experiments (28). The solid and dashed linesrepresent model cooling rates with and without a megaregolith, respectively. The core was still convecting(not solid) when the pallasites reached 633 K. So, the pallasites must be shallower than the depthindicated by the dotted line. For a 200-km-radius body, there is a region at radius (r) = ~160 km at whichboth the cooling rate and the paleomagnetic constraint are satisfied.
www.sciencemag.org SCIENCE VOL 338 16 NOVEMBER 2012 941
REPORTS
on
Nov
embe
r 16
, 201
2w
ww
.sci
ence
mag
.org
Dow
nloa
ded
from
core requires a temperature exceeding ~1200 K(29), so assuming conductive cooling (23), thepallasites we have investigated were in the top~60% of the protoplanet mantle. Cooling rates at800 K (the diffusion temperature of taenite) inthis depth range in a 200-km-radius body matchestimated pallasite metal cooling rates (28) of 2 to9 K per million years (Fig. 3). Conversely, in alarger 600-km-radius body the pallasites wouldhave to have resided in the near-surface mega-regolith,which is inconsistentwith their unshockedstate, whereas in a smaller 100-km-radius body,the cooling rate is too fast (Fig. 3). Compositionalconvection in the core (14) can drive the dynamo,and impacts can provide additional short-termstirring (30). For a 200-km-radius body, pressureeffects on the magnetization are likely minor (23).These conclusions on parent body size assume thepallasites were not remagnetized during impactheating subsequent to the olive-metal mixingevent. If such reheating occurred, parent bodiesranging from 100- to 200-km radius could satisfythe data, and the pallasites could have formeddeeper in the parent body, within 10% of thecore-mantle boundary. However, we view this asimprobable because such reheating is inconsist-ent with the low observed pallasite shock state (23).
The factor of ~2 difference between Esqueland Imilac paleointensity estimates could indi-cate different positions within the protoplanet. Forinstance, the Esquel and Imilac meteorites couldhave resided at original depths of 40 km and10 km, respectively, within a 200-km-radius body,assuming a dipolar field. In this case, the Curieisotherm of taenite would be reached at 180 mil-lion and 52 million years after the body formedfor the Esquel and Imilac pallasites, respectively(Fig. 3). The heat fluxes at the core at these timesare 33 and 0.8 mWm−2, respectively; the formerat least is sufficient to drive a dynamo if com-positional convection occurs (14). However, thepaleointensity difference could also be explainedby a smaller difference in original depth com-
bined with a time-dependent dynamo field. Inany event, generation of a strong, magnetic fieldby a dynamo at least several tens of millions ofyears after olivine/metal mixing is required byour data.
We recall that the pallasite metal is Ir poor,implicating a fractionated source. This require-ment together with the likely position of the pal-lasites in the protoplanet and the time constraintson when the dynamo was active suggest that thepallasite metal was derived from the liquid ironcore of a differentiated asteroid impactor (fig. S7)that struck before the Curie isothermwas reached.The metal could have been introduced into adunite mantle as dike-like intrusions, similar toimpact melt dikes seen in terrestrial impact struc-tures (31). This mechanism provides a solution tothe pallasite paradox because dikes propagatingthrough relatively cold olivine will undergo an ini-tial phase of rapid cooling, freezing in the olivine-metal pallasite structure, before cooling throughthe taenite Curie temperature. The differentiatedpallasite parent body may have been formed inthe terrestrial planet-forming zone (32). If so, thetiming of dynamo action suggests that the pal-lasite protoplanet was one of the few, late survi-vors in this zone before a cataclysmic collisionthat scattered pallasite fragments from a positioncloser to the Sun outward to the asteroid belt.
References and Notes1. L. Rayleigh, Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A Math. Phys. Sci.
179, 386 (1942).2. H. C. Urey, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 131, 199 (1966).3. J. T. Wasson, B. G. Choi, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 67,
3079 (2003).4. R. N. Clayton, Space Sci. Rev. 106, 19 (2003).5. E. R. D. Scott, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 41, 349 (1977).6. P. R. Buseck, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 41, 711 (1977).7. D. W. Mittlefehldt, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 51, 29 (1980).8. A. M. Davis, E. J. Olsen, Nature 353, 637 (1991).9. T. Matsui, S. Karato, T. Yokokura, Geophys. Res. Lett. 7,
1007 (1980).10. A. Brecher, L. Albright, J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 29, 379 (1977).11. T. Nagata, Mem. Natl. Inst. Polar Res. Spec. Issue 8, 240
(1978).
12. S. M. Cisowski, in Geomagnetism, J. A. Jacobs, Ed.(Academic Press, New York, 1987), vol. 2, pp. 525–560.
13. B. P. Weiss, J. Gattacceca, S. Stanley, P. Rochette,U. R. Christensen, Space Sci. Rev. 152, 341 (2010).
14. F. Nimmo, Geophys. Res. Lett. 36, L10201 (2009).15. B. P. Weiss et al., Science 322, 713 (2008).16. J. A. Tarduno, R. D. Cottrell, A. V. Smirnov, Rev. Geophys.
44, RG1002 (2006).17. J. A. Tarduno, R. D. Cottrell, M. K. Watkeys, D. Bauch,
Nature 446, 657 (2007).18. J. F. Lovering, L. G. Parry, J. C. Jaeger, Geochim.
Cosmochim. Acta 19, 156 (1960).19. T. Nagata, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 20, 324 (1979).20. A. P. Roberts, C. R. Pike, K. L. Verosub, J. Geophys. Res.
105, 28461 (2000).21. D. J. Dunlop, Ö. Özdemir, Rock Magnetism,
Fundamentals and Frontiers (Cambridge Univ. Press,Cambridge, 1997).
22. Y.-Y. Chuang, Y. A. Chang, R. Schmid, J.-C. Lin,Metall. Trans. A 17, 1361 (1986).
23. Materials and methods are available as supplementarymaterials on Science Online.
24. R. S. Coe, J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 19, 157 (1967).25. A. Jackson, A. R. T. Jonkers, M. R. Walker, Philos. Trans. R.
Soc. London A 358, 957 (2000).26. G. W. Lugmair, A. Shukolyukov, Geochim. Cosmochim.
Acta 62, 2863 (1998).27. Y. V. Bondar, V. P. Perelygin, Radiat. Meas. 36, 367
(2003).28. J. Yang, J. I. Goldstein, E. R. D. Scott, Geochim.
Cosmochim. Acta 74, 4471 (2010).29. A. Ghosh, H. Y. McSween Jr., Icarus 134, 187 (1998).30. M. Le Bars, M. A. Wieczorek, Ö. Karatekin, D. Cébron,
M. Laneuville, Nature 479, 215 (2011).31. W. U. Reimold, R. L. Gibson, Chem. Erde 66, 1 (2006).32. W. F. Bottke, D. Nesvorný, R. E. Grimm, A. Morbidelli,
D. P. O’Brien, Nature 439, 821 (2006).
Acknowledgments: We thank J. Hunt for assistance withmicroprobe analyses. This work was supported by NASAgrant NNX11AG66G and NSF grants EAR0619467 andEAR1015269 (to J.A.T.) Paleomagnetic data are includedin the supplementary materials.
Supplementary Materialswww.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/338/6109/939/DC1Materials and MethodsFigs. S1 to S7Tables S1 to S5References (33–65)
27 April 2012; accepted 5 October 201210.1126/science.1223932
Evidence for Early HaftedHunting TechnologyJayne Wilkins,1* Benjamin J. Schoville,2 Kyle S. Brown,2,3 Michael Chazan1
Hafting stone points to spears was an important advance in weaponry for early humans. Multiple linesof evidence indicate that ~500,000-year-old stone points from the archaeological site of Kathu Pan1 (KP1), South Africa, functioned as spear tips. KP1 points exhibit fracture types diagnostic of impact.Modification near the base of some points is consistent with hafting. Experimental and metric dataindicate that the points could function well as spear tips. Shape analysis demonstrates that the smallerretouched points are as symmetrical as larger retouched points, which fits expectations for spear tips.The distribution of edge damage is similar to that in an experimental sample of spear tips and isinconsistent with expectations for cutting or scraping tools. Thus, early humans were manufacturinghafted multicomponent tools ~200,000 years earlier than previously thought.
Behavioral traits common to both modernhumans and Neandertals could repre-sent shared traits inherited from their
last common ancestor, commonly held to beHomo heidelbergensis (1, 2). The fossil recordfor H. heidelbergensis begins during the early
Middle Pleistocene, and genetic studies situ-ate the divergence of H. sapiens and Neandertallineages at between ~800 and 400 thousand yearsago (ka) (3). Because Middle Stone Age (MSA)hominins and Neandertals probably both hadstone-tipped hunting equipment, it is possible thatH. heidelbergensis also possessed this form oftechnology.
By ~780 ka, hominins were regularly killinglarge game, based on evidence of repeated in situprocessing of complete carcasses of fallow deer atGesher Benot Ya’kov in Israel (4). At the English
1Department of Anthropology, University of Toronto, 19 RussellStreet, Toronto, Ontario M5S 2S2, Canada. 2Institute of HumanOrigins, School of Human Evolution and Social Change, PostOffice Box 872402, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ85287-4101, USA. 3Department of Archaeology, University ofCape Town, Rondebosch 7701, South Africa.
*To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail:jayne.wilkins@utoronto.ca
16 NOVEMBER 2012 VOL 338 SCIENCE www.sciencemag.org942
REPORTS
on
Nov
embe
r 16
, 201
2w
ww
.sci
ence
mag
.org
Dow
nloa
ded
from
www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/338/6109/939/DC1
Supplementary Material for
Evidence for a Dynamo in the Main Group Pallasite Parent Body
John A. Tarduno,* Rory D. Cottrell, Francis Nimmo, Julianna Hopkins, Julia Voronov, Austen Erickson, Eric Blackman, Edward R.D. Scott, Robert McKinley
*To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: john.tarduno@rochester.edu
Published 16 November 2012, Science 338, 939 (2012)
DOI: 10.1126/science.1223932
This PDF file includes:
Materials and Methods
Figs. S1 to S7
Tables S1 to S5
References (33–65)
Tarduno et al., Evidence for a dynamo in the main group pallasite parent body
Supporting Online Material
Materials and Methods
Magnetic hysteresis data were collected using the University of Rochester Princeton Measure-
ments Corporation Alternating Gradient Force Magnetometer. Values for the examples shown in
Fig. 1 of the main text are as follows: Hcr, Hc and Mr/Ms are 154.6 Oe, 200.0 Oe and 0.3911
respectively for the Esquel specimen, and 111.1 Oe, 151.9 Oe and 0.3714, respectively, for the
Imilac specimen. For all remanence measurements we select mm-sized gem-like olivine subsam-
ples, lacking any surface discoloration that might be residual contamination from the surrounding
pallasite metal (we note that our initial tests revealed that samples with visible inclusions from
olivine crystal rims altered rapidly when heated). Obtaining suitable samples generally required
cleaning crystals in distilled water. A weak acid (HCl) was used on some crystals to remove surface
contamination. Remanence measurements were made with a 2G Enterprises 3-component 755R
DC SQUID magnetometer and a 2G small (6.3 mm) bore 3-component DC SQUID magnetometer
in the University of Rochester’s magnetically shielded room (ambient field <200 nT). CO2 laser
heating and cooling was conducted (in air) in additional magnetic shields to produce a magnetically
null environment.
Olivine samples 2-3 millimeters in size were mounted on the end of quartz tubes with Omega
cement (both of which are routinely measured to ensure the blank is in the 10−13 to 10−14 A m2
range). The sample holder also served as the target for CO2 laser heating (the 7 mm diameter laser
beam applied at peak temperature for ∼1 minute ensures uniform heating of the crystal; heatings
at each Thellier-Coe paleointensity step were for 3 minutes). The natural remanent magnetization
of approximately 15% of the clean crystal subsamples measured were in the 10−9 to 10−10 A m2
range; these are the focus of our studies as the magnetizations are well within the measuring
range of the DC SQUID magnetometers throughout the demagnetization procedures. The success
rate for crystals having these intensities (yielded interpretable paleointensity results) was ∼50%.
This compares well with paleointensity success rates from Thellier-Coe experiments on whole-rock
terrestrial basalts, which often average 20% (or less).
Thellier-Coe (24) paleointensity data consist of demagnetization of the NRM (field-off step),
followed by the reheating of the sample at the same temperature in a known applied field (field-on
step). We use orthogonal vector plots of the field-off steps to determine the optimal tempera-
ture range to calculate paleointensities. In this study, we typically use a lowermost Thellier-Coe
unblocking temperature for paleointensity calculation that is slightly higher than the lowest un-
blocking temperature where we believe a primary magnetization is held (i.e. 360 oC). This approach
is conservative, and aimed to avoid any influence of magnetizations held at lower unblocking tem-
peratures. For consistency, we use this same temperature range in determining paleointensity from
Total TRM data (see below), although we note that some minor alteration might be expected given
the cumulative time at elevated temperature.
1
Heatings were minimized by collecting Thellier-Coe paleointensity data only in the temperature
range where orthogonal vector plots show univectorial decay. An applied field of 60 µT was used for
all Thellier-Coe measurements. After NRM demagnetization and collection of Thellier-Coe data,
a Total TRM was applied. Using a CO2 laser, samples were heated to 700 oC and then cooled
in the presence of a field over a 10 minute time span. The Total TRM was subsequently stepwise
demagnetized using the CO2 laser. An applied field of 60 µT was used in the collection of all initial
Total TRM data. After demagnetization of the first Total TRM, subsample Imilac E3 was given
a second Total TRM in the presence of a 30 µT field (and subsequently demagnetized with a CO2
laser) to check for any potential applied field dependence on paleointensity.
To test for consistency in magnetic directions, an oriented section 1-mm thick was prepared.
Metal was etched away, leaving several mutually oriented gem-like olivine crystals, which we sub-
sequently separated (maintaining orientation) and thermally demagnetized using the CO2 laser.
SOM Text
Paleointensity selection criteria. Examples of accepted results are shown in Figure 2 of the main
text. Two additional examples of accepted results are included here (fig. S1). Results of Thellier-
Coe and Total TRM paleointensity experiments are reported in tables S1-2. Values are judged
acceptable if Thellier-Coe paleointensity and Total TRM paleofield estimates are consistent within
15% (see table S2). The uncertainty in the individual Thellier-Coe and Total TRM paleointensity
estimates must be ≤15%
Here we use demagnetization of a Total TRM to assess alteration because it can readily detect
(and in our case exclude) whole-scale transformations with heating seen in some FeNi magnetic
carriers in meteorites (10). Although our heating times using the CO2 laser are very rapid compared
to those of standard ovens used in paleomagnetism, we note that at the end of our experiments a
specimen has still been exposed to elevated temperatures for a cumulative time exceeding 2 hours.
We forgo pTRM checks (33) which, if applied, would have resulted in even longer cumulative times
at elevated temperature. The Total TRM data also aid in the interpretation of magnetizations
observed at high unblocking temperatures. For example, some Esquel olivine specimens acquire
additional partial TRMs after the temperature at which the NRM appears to have been completely
demagnetized. This is expressed as a flattening of NRM/TRM data (Fig. 2C), which in itself
might suggest that a very low (or null) field is recorded at high unblocking temperatures. However,
demagnetization of a Total TRM reveals only a minor TRM in this same temperature interval (Fig.
2D) suggesting that increases in partial TRM at high temperatures reflect either minor alteration
and/or the influence of minor, and more complex, magnetic phases (see discussion in “Minor high
unblocking temperature magnetizations” below).
Several factors contribute to the cause of unsuccessful experiments. The NRM intensity of
some samples decreased rapidly on AF demagnetization to levels after which measurement with
the SQUID magnetometers through an entire paleointensity run was no longer viable. The main
cause of unsuccessful samples that did not display such AF demagnetization characteristics appears
2
to be thermally-induced alteration. This was manifested by either a scattered NRM demagnetiza-
tion pattern (fig S2A,B) and/or a Total TRM curve that differed markedly from that of the NRM
demagnetization (fig S2B,C).
A B C
D
Inte
nsity x
10
-11 A
m2
Imilac
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Total TRM
NRM
Esquel
410
Inte
nsity x
10
-11 A
m2
Temperature oC
360
410W E
N,Up
S,Down
0
5
10
15
0 5 10
500
410
NR
M (
x 1
0-1
1 A
m2)
TRM (x 10-11 A m2)
109.6 μT
0
20
40
60
80
100
350 400 450 500
Inte
nsity x
10
-11 A
m2
Temperature oC
113.4 μT
0
5
10
0 200 400 600 800
Temperature oC
400 500
NR
M (
x 1
0-1
1 A
m2)
TRM (x 10-11 A m2)
57.9 μT
400
500
0
1
0 1
E F G
H
W E
320
N,Up
S, Down
250
400
Temperature oC
Inte
nsity x
10
-11 A
m2
350 400 450 500
59.9 μT
0
1
2
3
Fig. S1. Additional examples of successful paleointensity experiments on pallasite olivine. (A)
Demagnetization of natural remanent magnetization (NRM) of Esquel olivine (black line). (B)
Orthogonal vector plot of (A), red is inclination, blue is declination (orientation relative). (C)
Thellier-Coe paleointensity data, NRM removed versus thermoremanent magnetization (TRM)
gained using a 60 µT applied field suggests a paleofield of 109.6 µT. (D) Demagnetization of a
laboratory Total TRM acquired in a 60 µT field (red curve in (A)) suggests a paleofield of 113.4
µT (calculated by comparing values at three temperature steps highlighted by grey boxes). (E-H)
Paleointensity data as discussed above on Imilac olivine indicating paleofields of 57.9 µT (Thellier-
Coe technique, 60 µT applied field) and 59.9 µT (Total TRM method, 60 µT applied field).
3
A B
C
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
N
S
W E
Temperature oC
Inte
nsity (
x10
−11 A
m2)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
N
S
EW
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Inte
nsity (
x10
−11 A
m2)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Temperature oC
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Inte
nsity (
x10
−11 A
m2)
Temperature oC
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
N
S
W E
Fig. S2. Examples of paleointensity results that did not meet selection criteria. Intensity versus
temperature plots show natural remanent magnetization (NRM) decay (A,B,C) (black) and Total
Thermoremanent Magnetization decay (B,C) (red). Orthogonal vector plots are shown for NRM
demagnetization (red is inclination, blue is declination of relative orientation).
Paleointensity results and averages. Two pallasite meteorites were sampled (Esquel and Imi-
lac). Two thin slabs from each pallasite were available for study (denoted by 1, 2, respectively in
the tables below). Several consistency tests were performed and the results of these tests were in-
corporated into hierarchial averages (tables S3-4) as follows. For Total TRM, paleofield results from
the same crystal measured at different applied field values were averaged (“applied field average”).
Paleofield results from different subsamples from a single olivine crystal were averaged (“crystal
average”). Results from different crystals from a given meteorite sample were averaged (“meteorite
sample estimate”). “Meteorite averages” were determined by averaging the two meteorite sample
estimates available for each meteorite studied.
4
Table S1. Thellier-Coe paleointensity estimates.
Subsample FThC (µT) T (oC) [N] R2 f g
Esquel 1 (green4) 132.4 ±5.7 400-500 [3] 0.92 0.155 0.278
Esquel 2 (19c) 110.7 ±5.2 400-450 [3] 0.98 0.129 0.493
Esquel 2 (3c) 116.0 ±5.4 410-485 [6] 0.98 0.185 0.788
Esquel 2 (4b) 109.6 ±7.0 410-500 [7] 0.99 0.184 0.724
Imilac 1 (F8) 74.4 ±6.7 400-500 [3] 0.92 0.058 0.392
Imilac 1 (E3) 64.9 ±4.5 400-500 [5] 0.98 0.059 0.742
Imilac 1 (E7) 57.9 ±7.8 400-500 [5] 0.97 0.031 0.707
Imilac 2 (G9)* 82.1 ±6.3 425-520 [5] 0.98 0.038 0.739
Imilac 2 (G12) 79.3 ±7.2 400-520 [6] 0.94 0.081 0.726
Abbreviations: FThC , Thellier-Coe field value with 1σ uncertainty; T , temperature range of fit; N ,
number of temperature steps used in fit; f, g are fraction of NRM fit and gap factor, respectively,
from (33). ∗ Sample omitted from averages because of high Total TRM paleointensity uncertainty
(see table S2).
Table S2. Total TRM paleointensity estimates.
Subsample FTTRM (µT) T (oC) [N] ∆FTTRM−FThC%
Esquel 1 (green4) 134.3 ±6.1 400-500 [3] 1
Esquel 2 (19c) 118.8 ±5.7 400-450 [3] 7
Esquel 2 (3c) 115.9 ±6.8 410-485 [3] <-1
Esquel 2 (4b) 113.4 ±4.0 410-500 [3] 3
Imilac 1 (F8) 72.1 ±1.0 400-500 [3] -3
Imilac 1 (E3)† 65.9 ±4.4 400-500 [3] 2
Imilac 1 (E3)‡ 67.3 ±3.4 400-500 [3] 4
Imilac 1 (E7) 59.9 ±1.0 400-500 [3] 3
Imilac 2 (G9)* 84.5 ±15.5 425-520 [3] 3
Imilac 2 (G12) 77.7 ±2.2 400-520 [3] - 2
Abbreviations: FTTRM , Total TRM field value estimate with 1σ uncertainty; T , temperature range
of fit; N , number of temperature steps used in fit; ∆FTTRM−FThC, difference between Total TRM
and Thellier-Coe paleointensity estimates, expressed as percent of the Thellier-Coe value. † 60 µT
applied field; ‡ 30 µT applied field. ∗ Sample omitted from averages because of high Total TRM
paleointensity uncertainty.
5
Table S3. Thellier-Coe hierarchical paleointensity averages.
Subsample FThC (µT) Crystal Meteorite sample estimate Meteorite
average (µT) (µT) average (µT)
Esquel 1
green4 132.4 ±5.7 132.4 Esquel
Esquel 2 122.3 ±14.4
19c 110.7 ±5.2 112.1 ±3.4 (N=2)
3c 116.0 ±5.4 (N=3)
4b 109.6 ±7.0
Imilac 1
F8 74.4 ±6.7 67.9 ±9.2 Imilac
E3 64.9 ±4.5 61.4 ±4.9 (N=2) 73.6 ±8.1
E7 57.9 ±7.8 (N=2) (N=2)
Imilac 2
G12 79.3 ±7.2 79.3
Abbreviations: FThC , Thellier-Coe field value. All averages shown with 1σ uncertainty.
Table S4. Total TRM hierarchical paleointensity averages.
Subsample FTTRM (µT) Applied field Crystal Meteorite sample Meteorite
average (µT) average (µT) estimate (µT) average (µT)
Esquel 1
green4 134.3 ±6.1 134.3 Esquel
Esquel 2 125.2 ±12.9
19c 118.8 ±5.7 116.0 ±2.7 (N=2)
3c 115.9 ±6.8 (N=3)
4b 113.4 ±4.0
Imilac 1
F8 72.1 ±1.0 67.7 ±6.2
E3† 65.9 ±4.4 66.6 ±1.0 (N=2)
E3‡ 67.3 ±3.4 (N=2) 63.3 ±4.7
E7 59.9 ±1.0 (N=2) Imilac
Imilac 2 72.7 ±7.1
G12 77.7 ±2.2 77.7 (N=2)
Abbreviations: FTTRM , Total TRM field value estimate. All averages shown with 1σ uncertainty.† 60 µT applied field; ‡ 30 µT applied field.
6
Minor high unblocking temperature magnetizations. Although the dominant natural re-
manent magnetization is removed by thermal demagnetization between 360 and 500 oC, consistent
with a taenite carrier, we note there is a very small signal (1-5% of the NRM) at demagnetization
temperatures >500 oC in some samples. On the basis of microprobe analyses (discussed below) and
potential unblocking temperatures, we consider these small signals to be carried by a fine-grained
mixture of taenite and kamacite. We further note that some samples show a small NRM and To-
tal TRM remanence increase (and subsequent decrease) at thermal demagnetization temperatures
>500 oC (cf Figure 2). This increase generally occurs over a restricted temperature range (∼100oC), but its exact initiation temperature varies between samples. We interpret this as reflecting ex-
change interaction between fine-grained taenite and kamacite. Because these are very minor phases
compared to the bulk magnetization, this interaction is not apparent in FORC diagrams. We also
note that small amounts of tetrataenite could be recorded at these high unblocking temperatures.
However, the reproducibility of the intensity increase seen in demagnetization of a Total TRM (see
Figure 2e) indicates that tetrataenite cannot be solely responsible for these minor magnetizations
because tetrataenite should not have survived heating to 700 oC (i.e. the temperature at which the
Total TRM was applied).
Terrestrial weathering. Unblocking temperatures similar (but not identical) to those reported
in our study have been reported by Uehara et al. (34) in weathered chondrite meteorites and
interpreted to reflect maghemite and substituted magnetite formed during terrestrial weathering,
resulting in a terrestrial magnetization overprinting an extraterrestrial signal. This was not the
case for chondrites with no or little weathering. Maghemite generally inverts after heating above
250 oC (21), and this results in irreversible magnetic behavior; this was not observed in our thermal
demagnetization experiments. Moreover, evidence for maghemite or a substituted magnetite phase
was not found during our SEM or microprobe analyses (detailed below), whereas clear evidence
for FeNi particles was identified. However, we emphasize that our analyses have been restricted to
gem-like olivine particles. Our meteorite samples were selected to have minimal weathering. Al-
though not studied here, we predict that weathered pallasite olivines do contain magnetic minerals
formed during terrestrial weathering.
SEM and Microprobe analyses of FeNi particles. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM)
analyses were conducted using a Zeiss SUPRA 40VP with EDAX spectrometer at the University
of Rochester. SEM analyses reveal FeNi inclusions that are potential remanence recorders. These
are similar to those reported in some prior studies (35-36) but differ from the tubular symplectic
inclusions studied in the Fukang pallasite (37). We observed some Cr-rich inclusions, but these
are not candidates for the major NRM carrier which demagnetizes between 360 and 500 oC. SEM
analyses of an olivine inclusion that is a candidate remanence carrier from the Esquel meteorite is
shown in fig. S3.
7
Maps of inclusion 7 in crystal D2
FeK FeL
Mg
NiL NiK
OSi
S
C
Esquel - Crystal D2, Inclusion 7
Fig. S3. SEM analyses of an inclusion in olivine of the Esquel pallasite meteorite. EDAX K and
L shell shell composition maps are shown for Fe and Ni.
EDAX spectra show an absence of Si, Mg and O, indicating that the inclusion is distinct from the
olivine matrix. Sulfur-rich regions (darker grey areas of the inclusion in the SEM image) separate
concentrations of FeNi within the inclusion.
Compositions of inclusions were further explored using a JEOL 8900 electron microprobe at
Cornell University with an accelerating voltage of 8 KeV to obtain ∼0.5 micron resolution. Electron
microprobe results reveal FeNi compositions within the inclusion (fig. S4). A pentlandite (Fe,
Ni)9S8 standard from Manibridge, Ontario (weight percentages S: 33.01, Fe: 30.77, Co: 0.10, Ni:
36.12) was used for these analyses. Total weight percentages less than 100% in the analyses plotted
reflect the presence of elements other than Fe and Ni (mostly S). The compositions of Ni-rich
particles overlap with those of the ordered FeNi mineral tetrataenite. However, the dominant
8
changes in NRM intensity do not match the characteristic magnetic decay pattern related to the
∼550 oC Curie temperature of tetrataenite (38) (see also fig. S5). In addition, as noted above, the
reproducibility exhibited by the Total TRM data (Figure 2, tables S2, S4) are inconsistent with
tetrataenite.
Esquel - Crystal D2 Inclusion 7 - Microprobe Analysis
2µm
A
D
F
B
E
G
C
H
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
11000
12000
Coun
ts
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
keV
Fe
C
S FeNi AlMg
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
11000
Coun
ts
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
keV
Ni
Fe
C
SAlFeSi
O
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
Coun
ts
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
keV
Fe
C
S FeNi
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
Coun
ts
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
keV
Fe
C
S
MgFe
S
S
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
11000
Coun
ts
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
keV
Ni
Fe
C
SAl FeMg Si
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
Coun
ts
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
keV
Ni
Fe
C
SAl FeMg Si
Ni
Fe
CS
Al FeO
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
Coun
ts
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
keV
Fe
C
S Fe
Ni
AlO
Ca0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
11000
12000
Coun
ts
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
keV
Ni Fe Total Weight 57.022 42.845 99.867Atomic 55.8707 44.1293 100
Ni Fe Total Weight 58.136 42.209 100.345Atomic 56.7148 43.2852 100
Ni Fe Total Weight 52.25 44.877 97.127Atomic 52.5523 47.4477 100
Ni Fe Total Weight 3.237 101.377 104.614Atomic 2.9478 97.0522 100
Ni Fe Total Weight 3.015 99.185 102.2Atomic 2.8103 97.1897 100
Ni Fe Total Weight 52.702 41.762 94.464Atomic 54.5557 45.4443 100
Ni Fe Total Weight 0.126 45.685 45.811Atomic 0.2622 99.7378 100
Fig. S4. Electron microprobe results for Esquel olivine (same inclusion shown in Fig. S4).
Brightest areas (B,F,G,H) are high Ni, surrounded by Fe sulfide (A). Slightly less bright areas are
low Ni, FeNi metal (C,D). Area (E) likely samples region of several adjacent grains, but nonetheless
demonstrates S between region of low and high Ni.
9
0
20
40
60
80
0 200 400 600 800
Inte
nsity
x10
-10
A m
2
Temperature oC
Observed NRM
Observed Total TRM
400
400
Predicted tetrataenitedemagnetization
Fig. S5. Predicted tetrataenite NRM demagnetization behavior versus observed demagnetization
of NRM and total TRM of an Esquel pallasite olivine subsample (cf. Figure 2). Note the NRM
value of the hypothetical tetrataenite component is arbitrary, and the decay qualitative, drawn
after the behavior reported by Wasilewski (38).
We interpret the dominant magnetic recorder in inclusions within the pallasite olivine as
metastable, disordered taenite. We note that this conclusion differs from the result of a thermo-
magnetic analysis of the “silicate” (presumable olivine) part of a pallasite (Yamato-74044) reported
in an early study by Nagata (11) which is consistent with kamacite. We note, however, that our
analyses have been restricted to gem-like olivines lacking large inclusions. It is possible that con-
tamination from the metal surrounding the olivine (especially near the olivine rim) was responsible
for the signal reported by Nagata (11).
Given the slow cooling recorded by the massive FeNi surrounding the olivine (28), we might ex-
pect taenite to have ordered. However, the high-Ni magnetic carriers in olivine have a very different
origin from the tetrataenite rims in the metallic matrix as the latter formed by low temperature
equilibration between FeNi phases whereas the former are minor components in FeS inclusions that
are predominantly composed of FeS. We envisage that the Fe-Ni-S inclusions were injected as a
melt into cracks [perhaps at ∼900 oC, (39)] which were sealed up on cooling. We speculate that
minor Fe exchange between the FeNi and FeS phases during slow cooling may inhibit ordering in
very small particles such as those that characterize the olivine magnetic inclusions.
Pressure effects on magnetization. Hydrostatic pressure can potentially affect magnetizations
(21). Turcotte and Schubert [(40), eq. 2-71] give the pressure as a function of radial position r
inside a homogeneous body of density ρ:
P =2
3πρ2G(R2 − r2) (1)
where R is the radius of the body and G is the gravitational constant. Taking our estimates of the
size of the pallasite parent body, R=200 km, ρ=3 g/cc, we obtain pressures of 9.6 MPa at r =180 km
10
and 22 MPa at r=150 km. Although detailed pressure experiments are not available on sub-micron
sized FeNi particles at these estimated pressures, we note that our estimates of pressures are much
lower than the value at which substantial changes are observed in magnetite and titanomagnetite
[e.g. (41-42)] and FeNi (43). Shock can induce much larger pressures. However, beyond the event
that caused olivine-metal mixing and break-up of the parent body, pallasites do not appear to
have been affected by the massive shocks that characterize other meteorites. For example, pallasite
metal does not show the characteristic hatched pattern seen in shocked IIIAB iron meteorites (44 ),
and dislocation densities are low in both olivine and metal [e.g. (9, 45)].
Martelli and Newton (46) studied shock associated with a hypervelocity projectile (15 km/s)
cratering a terrestrial basalt and proposed that a shock magnetization comparable to a TRM could
be produced. In this case, the shock magnetization was thought to be related to a plasma formed
by the impact. Because the pallasites we have studied lack massive shock features, we believe they
were not near the surface at the time of the impact that disrupted the parent body. In this case, the
more relevant far-field remagnetization process is shock-induced crystallographic transformation.
Dickinson and Wasilewski (47) found that this process normally induces a magnetization much less
than that recorded by our TRM experiments.
Absolute ages of metal-olivine mixing. Lugmair and Shukolyukov (26) report 53Mn-53Cr
systematics on main group pallasites Omolon and Springwater, suggesting ages of 4558.0 ± 1.0 Ma
and ∼4557 Ma, respectively. These ages are consistent with those reported from Re-Os systematics
by Shen et el. (48) (4.60± 0.5 Ga), who interpret the time scale for pallasite fractional crystalization
as spanning 10-20 Myr. These ages provide an upper bound (i.e. oldest age) on the time of metal-
olivine mixing.
In an early K-Ar study, Megrue (49) reported ages of 4.3 Ga for 3 pallasites (Krasnojarsk,
Marjalahti, and Springwater). A much younger 40Ar-39Ar age of 0.86 Ga has been reported for
the non-main group pallasite Eagle Station by Niemeyer (50), and interpreted as recording an
impact of that age. But that study was conducted on weathered olivine [(50), p. 1007] and the age
probably reflects terrestrial processes. Similarly Megrue (49), noted that an apparent young Kr-Ar
age of 0.44 Ga for the Admire pallasite could reflect “diffusion of radiogenic Ar40” or “potassium
contamination of the sample by terrestrial weathering”.
Bondar and Perelygin (27) reported model fission track ages of 4.37 Ga ± 0.01 Ga for the
Marjalahti pallasite, 4.19 ± 0.02 Ga for the Omolon pallasite, 4.18 ± 0.03 Ga for the Bragin pall-
asite and 4.21 ± 0.02 for the Krasnoyarsk pallasite. Given that the temperature for the complete
removal of tracks is 450-500 oC (27), these ages could be close to the time of acquisition of the
magnetizations we have recorded. However, such an assignment depends critically on the accuracy
of the fission track age model. Nevertheless, these ages provide a lower bound (i.e. youngest age)
on the time of metal-olivine mixing.
Thermal modeling. Given the uncertainties in even such basic parameters as its size, we adopt
11
a very simple model to track the thermal evolution of the pallasite parent body. This model re-
sembles those of previous investigations [e.g. (29, 51-53)]; one important complication, however,
is that it includes an insulating, near-surface megaregolith (54-55). Although, especially for the
larger bodies, mantle convection or advection via melt might be important in the early stages, we
simply assume spherically-symmetric conductive transfer of heat:
∂T
∂t=
1
r2∂
∂r
(κr2
∂T
∂r
)(2)
where T (r) is temperature, r is radial position, and κ is thermal diffusivity. We neglect internal
heat production because of the ∼100 Myr timescale of greatest interest to us. Since this timescale
is long compared to the decay of 26Al or 60Fe, the effect of this early heating is incorporated into
our initial conditions. Conversely, over the timescale of interest the decay of long-lived radiogenic
elements like 40K will not qualitatively change our conclusions.
The temperature at the surface (r = R) is kept at a fixed value Ts. The temperature gradient
at r = 0 is zero. We assume an isothermal initial condition (T=1600 K) in which the mantle is
solid but the core is liquid. We solve equation (2) numerically using a centered finite-difference
scheme.
The near-surface megaregolith layer is assumed to have a thermal diffusivity one-tenth that of
the solid rock (54). Based on Fig. 12 of Warren (55), we assume megaregolith thicknesses of 5, 8
and 24 km for bodies of radii 100, 200 and 600 km, respectively.
The megaregolith is important not only as an insulator, but also because it is an unlikely source
of the pallasites (which would have experienced shock and mixing with other silicate phases, neither
of which are observed). We consider large (600 km) objects as unlikely sources of pallasites because
the cooling rate data would require them to have originated within the megaregolith layer (see main
text). We also note that it is possible to ultimately disrupt the parent body by impact without
widespread heating (56).
If core solidification has not yet finished, we only solve equation (2) within the mantle and take
the temperature at the core-mantle boundary (r = Rc) as our boundary condition. The core is
assumed isothermal (due to vigorous convection) and its bulk temperature is updated based on the
heat extracted into the mantle (4πR2ckm
∂T∂r |r=Rc ∆t ) during that timestep ∆t , where km is the
mantle thermal conductivity. We take Rc = R/2.
We assume that the core solidifies at a single temperature Tl, here taken to be 1200 K. If T = Tl
during a particular timestep, the core temperature then remains pinned at that temperature until
the total latent heat of the core (43πR3cρcLc) has been extracted into the mantle via conduction.
Here Lc is the specific latent heat of the core material and ρc its density.
Once the core has completely solidified, we then proceed to solve equation (2) as before, but
now the bottom boundary condition is to set the temperature gradient to zero at r=0. Note that
the thermal diffusivities κm and κc for mantle and core respectively are quite different.
We use a grid spacing ∆r =R/100 and adopt a constant timestep governed by the Courant
criterion: ∆t =0.3∆r2/κc, where we use the core diffusivity because it is more restrictive. We
12
verified that our numerical model reproduces the analytical solutions for a uniform sphere cooling
from an isothermal initial state (57) when the core radius is zero. Parameter values adopted are
given in table S5.
This model ignores many details, such as the fact that core solidification is likely a multi-phase
process which involves a progressive reduction in solidus temperature as solidification proceeds.
Nonetheless, the conclusions reached in the main text are unlikely to be significantly affected by
such uncertainties. This is because the key results - cooling rate and liquid core lifetime - are
both primarily dependent on the size of the parent body, while a low blocking temperature implies
relatively shallow depths, irrespective of the details of the calculations.
In the main text we focus on the 2-9 K/Myr cooling data for main group pallasites obtained by
Yang et al. (28). We do not consider one higher rate reported in that study (18 K/Myr ± 9 K/Myr)
because of its high uncertainty; it also appears to be an outlier in cooling rate, and in cloudy zone
particle size versus tetrataenite bandwidth (Fig. 7 of Yang et al., (28)). Ito and Ganguly (58)
calculate a cooling rate of 20-40 K/Myr at 1000◦C on the basis of a thermochronological model
applied to 53Mn-53Cr age data on olivine from the Omolon pallasite (26). For our 200 km radius
model object, this cooling rate is obtained over a depth range of 6-20 km, which is compatible with
the results shown in Fig. 3 of the main text.
Because we envisage the metallic injections as being relatively narrow, dike-like features, they
will cool rapidly to attain the background temperature of the surrounding material. Their subse-
quent cooling history (including passage through the Curie temperature) will then simply be that
of the surrounding material.
We also considered the possible role of impact heating during the injection event, but concluded
that it was likely to have negligible effect on the overall cooling, as follows. Early in the history of the
asteroid belt, impact velocities were probably comparable to escape velocities. The escape velocity
is roughly 200 m/s (R/100 km) where R is the radius of the body. So for bodies a few hundred
km in radius, impact velocities will be lower than the sound speed of intact rock (a few km/s), i.e.
the impacts are subsonic. As a result, the impact heating (and associated shock pressures) will be
small. If all the kinetic energy of a 200 m/s projectile were contained within one projectile radius,
the temperature increase would only be about 20 K and the actual temperature change would be
even less, because the heat is in reality more broadly distributed.
Table S5. Thermal modeling parameters, based on Table 1 of Sahijpal et al. (52).
Quantity Value Units Quantity Value Units
Ts 250 K Tl 1213 K
ρm 3000 kg m−3 ρc 7800 kg m−3
κm 5× 10−7 m2 s−1 κc 5× 10−6 m2 s−1
Lc 0.27 MJ kg−1 km 3 Wm−1K−1
13
Late impact heating and remagnetization. Many HED meteorites have 39Ar-40Ar ages that
suggest impact-induced heating (59-60) to temperatures capable of partially (or completely) reset-
ting a magnetization that might have been acquired during initial cooling. Some of these impact
heating events occur as late as ∼3.4 Ga, at a time when dynamo action might have ceased on the
HED parent body (Vesta) due to core solidification. If the pallasite meteorites we have studied
were reheated in a similar manner, after dynamo cessation on the pallasite parent body, it would
affect our conclusions. Here, we first consider how our conclusions would be affected, and then
explore whether impact reheating is consistent with available constraints.
If the pallasites were reheated after dynamo action ceased, an ambient magnetic field still must
have been present to account for the magnetizations we have recorded. A potential source of this
ambient field is the entire parent body mantle and crust, which if magnetized during the dynamo
epoch would create a global remanent field. The relevant magnetic carrier of the magnetization
would be kamacite, since its high Curie point (approximately 765 oC, (21)) is consistent with the
idea that it could retain a magnetization even if heated to temperatures sufficient to reset the
magnetizations we have reported from the pallasites.
In this case, the constraints on the pallasite parent body would come from the cooling rates of
the pallasite metal and the inferred magnetization in the parent body mantle and crust (i.e. not
directly from the magnetization of the pallasite olivine, which in this scenario is reset by impact
heating and records only an echo of the dynamo). Given these new constraints, a 600 km radius
body can still be excluded because the pallasites would have to reside in the regolith. However,
we would have less resolution on the position of the pallasites within the parent body and on the
parent body size. Specifically, the pallasites could have formed deeper in the parent body, within
10% of the core-mantle boundary, and parent bodies ranging in size from 100 to 200 km radius
could satisfy the constraints.
Paleomagnetic directional and paleointensity data from the pallasite olivine are linear between
360 oC and 500 oC (Fig 2). It is unlikely that the ambient magnetic field during a hypothetical late
heating event induced by impact, and the field during initial cooling would be exactly the same.
Hence, following Thelliers’ laws of pTRM additivity (21), if the hypothetical late heating event
reached temperatures greater than 360 oC, but less than 500 oC, a break in slope would be seen in
the paleointensity and/or directional data. Because this is not observed, we conclude that any late
stage heating must have reached a temperature close to 500 oC to be compatible with the magnetic
data.
As noted above, a low velocity impact is insufficient to generate a temperature change great
enough to affect the magnetization. High-velocity impacts create transient high pressures; as the
material subsequently unloads along an adiabat, heating results with higher peak pressures causing
more heating (61). To quantify this effect we used the same approach and parameters as in Barnhart
et al. (62), Appendix A2. We calculate the peak pressure and temperature increase ∆T experienced
directly below the impactor. The results are plotted in Fig S6. As expected, there is an almost
linear relationship between peak pressure and temperature increase. A temperature increase to 500
14
oC is required to reset the magnetization. This implies temperature increases ranging from 300 K
for an impact shortly after core solidification to greater than 400 K for impacts >1 billion years
later. This heating range implies shock pressures ranging from 4.5 GPa to greater than 5.5 GPa
(∼45-55 kbar).
Studies of olivine dislocation density in main group pallasites limit shock pressure to a few
tens of bars (9). These shock levels are incompatible with the much higher shock (i.e. GPa’s)
that would accompany impacts needed to produce heating sufficient to reset the magnetizations we
have recorded. These studies were conducted only on the Admire, Brenham and Dora pallasites.
But metal macro- and microstructure is also sensitive to shock and shock-induced heating. For
example, shock up to 1 GPa can cause Neumann band (mechanical twins) in kamacite, and cloudy
taenite intergrowth can be completely lost upon short term heating (years) at 500 oC (63). Metal
microstructure has been examined in detail for the Esquel and Imilac pallasites (28) and no evidence
for shock has been reported.
Because relatively high shock accompanies impact heating (Fig. S6), and there is no evidence
of shock at these levels in the pallasites following the olivine-metal mixing event, we conclude that
resetting of the pallasite magnetization by impacts is unlikely. We therefore predict that any future
Ar-Ar or fission track dating efforts on the Esquel and Imilac pallasites should yield ages at least
as old as the 4.4-4.2 Ga ages (27) obtained from other main group pallasites.
Figure S6. Shock pressure and temperature increase as a function of impact velocity vi, calcu-
lated using the approach of Barnhart et al. ((62), Appendix A2). We assumed target and projectile
densities of 2.6 g/cc. Other parameters are as given in Barnhart et al. (62).
15
Model for parent body evolution. Our model for the origin of pallasites and the nature and
evolution of their parent body is based on paleomagnetic constraints, cooling rate data (28), thermal
modeling, and previously published geochemical analyses. We envision the impact of a differen-
tiated body with a partially solidified core into a larger differentiated body having a liquid core.
Liquid FeNi from the impactor intrudes into target dunite mantle in the form of dikes, which result
in the formation of the characteristic pallasite compositions. This source of FeNi metal satisfies
Ir constraints (3). The mantle and crust of the impactor are lost and/or incorporated into the
shallowest levels of the target. A similar impact scenario for the generalized case of planetesimal
accretion is presented by Asphaug et al. [(64) Figures 6-7, panels d-f of that paper]. It is also pos-
sible that the impactor had a very thin mantle/core, especially if it had seen prior impacts. There
are more complex scenarios that might meet the available constraints, but our central conclusions
are that the main group pallasites cooled in a body with a core dynamo and that the metal in
the pallasites did not come from that core. Our preferred model (fig. S7) is arguably the simplest
explanation of these findings.
Fig. S7 (next page). Our model for the origin of pallasites and the nature and evolution
of their parent body is based on paleomagnetic constraints and thermal modeling. (A) Liquid
FeNi from an impactor is injected into the mantle of the parent body. (B) Enlargement of boxed
region in (A) shows injection of metal in dike-like intrusions in dunite mantle, which result in the
pallasite texture (C) During the dike intrusion, metal is injected into fractures in the olivine (D);
these fractures subsequently heal upon cooling. Although we illustrate one impact, several similar
impacts might have occurred, and they together might explain the scatter in Ir values seen in main
group pallasites [e.g. (65)]. (E) Heat flux and temperature versus time. At a reference of 30 km
depth, the lower range of taenite Curie temperatures (estimated from the observed paleomagnetic
unblocking temperatures) will be reached at ∼137 million years after initial cooling. Core heat
flux is sufficient at this time to drive a dynamo if compositional convection occurs (14). (F) After
cooling below the lower Curie temperatures of taenite, collision of the pallasite parent body with
a similarly-sized protoplanet occurred, possibly in the terrestrial planet-forming zone [e.g. (32)],
destroying the pallasite parent body. (G) Pallasite meteorites were later scattered by interaction
with a protoplanet.
16
mag
netic
field
magnetic
field
0
50
100
T
ime,
Myr
150
200
250
300
2
0 2
00
4
0 4
00
6
0 6
00
8
0
coo
lin
g r
ate
reco
rded
b
lock
ing
tem
per
atu
re
8
00
-2 Heat flux out of core, mWm
100
C
ore
hea
t fl
ux
core
so
lid
ific
atio
n
star
ts
core
so
lid
ific
atio
n
en
ds
T
emp
erat
ure
(3
0 k
m d
epth
) 1000
120
Temperature, K
1200
~1
00
km
~1
cm
~1
0 μ
m
FG
BA
C
E
Fig
S7
D
17
References and Notes 1. L. Rayleigh, The stone-iron meteorites called pallasites: A synthetic study of their structure
and probable mode of formation. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A Math. Phys. Sci. 179, 386 (1942). doi:10.1098/rspa.1942.0012
2. H. C. Urey, Chemical evidence relative to the origin of the solar system. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 131, 199 (1966).
3. J. T. Wasson, B. G. Choi, Main-group pallasites: Chemical composition, relationship to IIIAB irons and origin. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 67, 3079 (2003). doi:10.1016/S0016-7037(03)00306-5
4. R. N. Clayton, Oxygen isotopes in the solar system. Space Sci. Rev. 106, 19 (2003). doi:10.1023/A:1024669116828
5. E. R. D. Scott, Pallasites- Metal composition, classification and relationships with iron meteorites. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 41, 349 (1977). doi:10.1016/0016-7037(77)90262-9
6. P. R. Buseck, Pallasite meteorites—Mineralogy, petrology and geochemistry. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 41, 711 (1977). doi:10.1016/0016-7037(77)90044-8
7. D. W. Mittlefehldt, The composition of mesosiderite olivine clasts and implications for the origin of pallasites. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 51, 29 (1980). doi:10.1016/0012-821X(80)90254-X
8. A. M. Davis, E. J. Olsen, Phosphates in pallasite meteorites as probes of mantle processes in small planetary bodies. Nature 353, 637 (1991). doi:10.1038/353637a0
9. T. Matsui, S. Karato, T. Yokokura, Dislocation structures of olivine from pallasite meteorites. Geophys. Res. Lett. 7, 1007 (1980). doi:10.1029/GL007i011p01007
10. A. Brecher, L. Albright, The thermoremance hypothesis and the origin of magnetization in iron meteorites. J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 29, 379 (1977). doi:10.5636/jgg.29.379
11. T. Nagata, Magnetic properties of an iron meteorite (Yamato-75031) and a pallasite (Yamato-74044). Mem. Natl. Inst. Polar Res. Spec. Issue 8, 240 (1978).
12. S. M. Cisowski, in Geomagnetism J.A. Jacobs, Ed. (Academic Press, N.Y., 1987), vol. 2, pp. 525–560.
13. B. P. Weiss, J. Gattacceca, S. Stanley, P. Rochette, U. R. Christensen, Paleomagnetic records of meteorites and early planetesimal differentiation. Space Sci. Rev. 152, 341 (2010). doi:10.1007/s11214-009-9580-z
14. F. Nimmo, Energetics of asteroid dynamos and the role of compositional convection. Geophys. Res. Lett. 36, L10201 (2009). doi:10.1029/2009GL037997
15. B. P. Weiss et al., Magnetism on the angrite parent body and the early differentiation of planetesimals. Science 322, 713 (2008). doi:10.1126/science.1162459 Medline
16. J. A. Tarduno, R. D. Cottrell, A. V. Smirnov, The paleomagnetism of single silicate crystals: Recording the geomagnetic field during mixed polarity intervals. Rev. Geophys. 44, RG1002 (2006). doi:10.1029/2005RG000189
1
17. J. A. Tarduno, R. D. Cottrell, M. K. Watkeys, D. Bauch, Geomagnetic field strength 3.2 billion years ago recorded by single silicate crystals. Nature 446, 657 (2007). doi:10.1038/nature05667 Medline
18. J. F. Lovering, L. G. Parry, J. C. Jaeger, Temperatures and mass losses in iron meteorites during ablation in the earth's atmosphere. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 19, 156 (1960). doi:10.1016/0016-7037(60)90002-8
19. T. Nagata, Meteorite magnetism and the early solar system magnetic field. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 20, 324 (1979). doi:10.1016/0031-9201(79)90055-4
20. A. P. Roberts, C. R. Pike, K. L. Verosub, FORC diagrams: A new tool for characterizing the magnetic properties of natural samples. J. Geophys. Res. 105, 28461 (2000). doi:10.1029/2000JB900326
21. D. J. Dunlop, Ö. Özdemir, Rock Magnetism, Fundamentals and frontiers (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1997).
22. Y.-Y. Chuang, Y. A. Chang, R. Schmid, J.-C. Lin, Magnetic contributions to the thermodynamic functions of alloys and the phase equilibria of Fe-Ni system below 1200 K. Metall. Trans. A 17, 1361 (1986). doi:10.1007/BF02650117
23. Materials and methods are available as supplementary materials on Science Online.
24. R. S. Coe, The determination of paleointensities of the Earth’s magnetic field with emphasis on mechanisms which could cause non-ideal behavior in Thellier’s method. J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 19, 157 (1967). doi:10.5636/jgg.19.157
25. A. Jackson, A. R. T. Jonkers, M. R. Walker, Four centuries of geomagnetic secular variation from historic records. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A 358, 957 (2000). doi:10.1098/rsta.2000.0569
26. G. W. Lugmair, A. Shukolyukov, Early solar system timescales according to 53Mn-53Cr systematics. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 62, 2863 (1998). doi:10.1016/S0016-7037(98)00189-6
27. Y. V. Bondar, V. P. Perelygin, Cosmic history of some pallasites based on fossil track studies. Radiat. Meas. 36, 367 (2003). doi:10.1016/S1350-4487(03)00153-7
28. J. Yang, J. I. Goldstein, E. R. D. Scott, Main-group pallasites: History, relationship to IIIAB irons, and origin. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 74, 4471 (2010). doi:10.1016/j.gca.2010.04.016
29. A. Ghosh, H. Y. McSween, Jr., A thermal model for the differentiation of asteroid 4 Vesta based on radiogenic heating. Icarus 134, 187 (1998). doi:10.1006/icar.1998.5956
30. M. Le Bars, M. A. Wieczorek, Ö. Karatekin, D. Cébron, M. Laneuville, An impact-driven dynamo for the early Moon. Nature 479, 215 (2011). doi:10.1038/nature10565 Medline
31. W. U. Reimold, R. L. Gibson, The melt rocks of the Vredefort impact structure—Vredefort granophyre and pseudotachylitic breccias: Implications for impact cratering and the evolution of the Witwatersrand Basin. Chem. Erde 66, 1 (2006). doi:10.1016/j.chemer.2005.07.003
2
32. W. F. Bottke, D. Nesvorný, R. E. Grimm, A. Morbidelli, D. P. O’Brien, Iron meteorites as remnants of planetesimals formed in the terrestrial planet region. Nature 439, 821 (2006). doi:10.1038/nature04536 Medline
33. R. S. Coe, C.S. Gromm_e, E.A. Mankinen, Geomagnetic paleointensities by the Thelliers’ method from radiocarbon dated lava ows on Hawaii: The Pacific non-dipole low. J. Geophys. Res. 83, 740 (1978).
34. M. Uehara, J. Gattacceca, P. Rochette, F. Demory, E. M. Valenzuela, Magnetic study of meteorites recovered in the Atacama desert (Chile): Implications for meteorite paleomagnetism and the stability of hot desert surfaces. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 200-201, 113 (2012). doi:10.1016/j.pepi.2012.04.007
35. V. V. Sharygin, S.V., Kovyazin, N.M. Podgornykh, Mineralogy of olivine-hosted inclusions from the Omolon pallasite. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. XXXVII, abstr. 1235 (2006); available at www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2006/pdf/1235.pdf.
36. Y. Sonzogni, B. Devouard, A. Provost, J.-L. Devidal, Olivine-hosted melt inclusions in the Brahin pallasite. 72nd Ann. Meteoritical Soc. Meet. abstr. 5070 (2009); available at www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/metsoc2009/pdf/5070.pdf.
37. M. R. Stevens, D. R. Bell, P. R. Buseck, Tubular symplectic inclusions in olivine from the Fukang pallasite. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 45, 899 (2010). doi:10.1111/j.1945-5100.2010.01054.x
38. P. Wasilewski, Magnetic characterization of the new magnetic mineral tetrataenite and its contrast with isochemical taenite. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 52, 150 (1988). doi:10.1016/0031-9201(88)90063-5
39. G. Kullerud, The Fe-Ni-S System, Year Book. Carnegie Inst. Washington 62, 175 (1962/63).
40. D. L. Turcotte, G. Schubert, Geodynamics (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, ed. 2, 2002).
41. S. A. Gilder, M. LeGoff, J. C. Chervin, J. Peyronneau, Magnetic properties of single and multi-domain magnetite under pressures from 0 to 6 GPa. Geophys. Res. Lett. 31, L10612 (2004). doi:10.1029/2004GL019844
42. S. A. Gilder, M. LeGoff, Systematic pressure enhancement of titanomagnetite magnetization. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35, L10302 (2008). doi:10.1029/2008GL033325
43. N. S. Bezaeva, J. Gattacceca, P. Rochette, R. A. Sadykov, V. I. Trukhin, Demagnetization of terrestrial and extraterrestrial rocks under hydrostatic pressure up to 1.2 GPa. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 179, 7 (2010). doi:10.1016/j.pepi.2010.01.004
44. V. F. Buchwald, Handbook of Iron Meteorites: Their History, Distribution, Composition and Structure (Univ. California Press, Berkeley, CA, 1975).
45. A. Desrousseaux, J. C. Diukhan, H. Leroux, J. C. van Duyen, An analytical electron microscope investigation of some pallasites. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 103, 101 (1997). doi:10.1016/S0031-9201(97)00025-3
46. G. Martelli, G. Newton, Hypervelocity cratering and impact magnetization of basalt. Nature 269, 478 (1977). doi:10.1038/269478a0
3
47. T. L. Dickinson, P. Wasilewski, Shock magnetism in fine particle iron. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 35, 65 (2000). doi:10.1111/j.1945-5100.2000.tb01974.x
48. J. J. Shen, D. A. Papanastassiou, G. Wasserburg, Re-Os systematics in pallasite and mesosiderite metal. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 62, 2715 (1998). doi:10.1016/S0016-7037(98)00187-2
49. G. M. Megrue, Rare gas chronology of hypersthene achondrites and pallasites. J. Geophys. Res. 73, 2027 (1968). doi:10.1029/JB073i006p02027
50. S. Niemeyer, I-Xe 40Ar-39Ar analyses of silicate from the Eagle Station pallasite and the anomalous iron meteorite Enon. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 47, 1007 (1983). doi:10.1016/0016-7037(83)90230-2
51. P. J. Hevey, I. S. Sanders, A model for planetesimal meltdown by 26Al and its implications for meteorite parent bodies. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 41, 95 (2006). doi:10.1111/j.1945-5100.2006.tb00195.x
52. S. Sahijpal, P. Soni, G. Gupta, Numerical simulations of the differentiation of accreting planetesimals with Al-26 and Fe-60 as the heat sources. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 42, 1529 (2007). doi:10.1111/j.1945-5100.2007.tb00589.x
53. L. T. Elkins-Tanton, B. P. Weiss, M. T. Zuber, Chondrites as samples of differentiated planetesimals. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 305, 1 (2011). doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2011.03.010
54. H. Haack, K. L. Rasmussen, P. H. Warren, Effects of regolith megaregolith insulation on the cooling histories of differentiated asteroids. J. Geophys. Res. 95, (B4), 5111 (1990). doi:10.1029/JB095iB04p05111
55. P. H. Warren, Ejecta-megaregolith accumulation on planetesimals and large asteroids. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 46, 53 (2011).
56. T. M. Davison, G. S. Collins, F. J. Ciesla, Numerical modeling of heating in porous planetesimal collisions. Icarus 208, 468 (2010). doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2010.01.034
57. H. S. Carslaw, J. C. Jaeger, Conduction of Heat in Solids (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, ed. 2, 1986).
58. M. Ito, J. Ganguly, Diffusion kinetics of Cr in olivine and 53Mn-53Cr thermochronology of early solar system objects. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 70, 799 (2006). doi:10.1016/j.gca.2005.09.020
59. D. D. Bogard, G. H. Garrison, 39Ar-40Ar ages of eucrites and thermal history of asteroid 4 Vesta. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 38, 669 (2003). doi:10.1111/j.1945-5100.2003.tb00035.x
60. D. D. Bogard, G. H. Garrison, Ar-Ar Impact Heating Ages of Eucrites and Timing of the LHB. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. XL, abstr. 1131 (2009); available at www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2009/pdf/1131.pdf.
61. H. J. Melosh, Impact Cratering: A Geologic Process (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1989).
62. C. J. Barnhart, F. Nimmo, B. J. Travis, Martian post-impact hydrothermal systems incorporating freezing. Icarus 208, 101 (2010). doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2010.01.013
4
5
63. J. Yang et al., Thermal and impact histories of reheated group IVA, IVB, and ungrouped iron meteorites and their parent asteroids. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 46, 1227 (2011). doi:10.1111/j.1945-5100.2011.01210.x
64. E. Asphaug, M. Jutzi, N. Movshovitz, Chondrule formation during planetesimal accretion. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 308, 369 (2011). doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2011.06.007
65. D. W. Mittlefehldt, T. J. McCoy, C. A. Goodrich, A. Kracher, in Planetary Materials, J.J. Papike, Ed. (Mineralogical Society of America, Washington, DC, 1998), chap. 4.
Recommended