4. Multi-Element Imaging of a Siderite Crystal
Fe is the most abundant element in siderite with no obvious rim structure (
Figure 4). The average Fe content of the crystal is 32.7%, corresponding to a FeCO
3 purity of 72.5%. Compared with the surrounding shale, both Mn and Zn are enriched in the siderite with similar rim structures. From the core to edge, elements of Mn and Zn are synchronously enriched (rim 1), weakly enriched (rim 2), enriched (rim 3), and weakly enriched (rim 4) in turn (
Figure 4). The wave features of the quantified contents of Zn and Mn in different rims varied over 50% between peaks and valleys (
Figure 5).
Figure 4. Multi-element imaging of an authigenic siderite crystal and its shale matrix obtained from the Laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry analysis. (a): Fe; (b): Mn; (c) Zn; (d): Al; (e): Si; (f) Structure diagram of the analyzed siderite crystal.
Figure 5. Element contents in different rims and zones, measured by LA-ICP-MS. Zones a and b are the rim 1 (core) of the crystal. The element contents in rock measured using chemical dissolution method (CD) were used to calculate the elements contents measured using LA-ICP-MS method (LA). The gray shadows indicate the standard division. (a): Fe; (b): Mn; (c) Zn; (d): Al; (e): Si; (f) Structure diagram of the analyzed siderite crystal.
Contrary to Mn and Zn, Al and Si exhibit depleted characteristics in the siderite crystal without obvious rims. However, in the core of crystal, there is a special zone (defined as zone a) with an Al content of 1.7%, higher than that in rim 2 (~0.4%) and rim 3 (~0.6%) (
Figure 5). Next to zone a, there is another special zone (defined as zone b) with a Mn content of 3.8%, higher than that in rim 2 (~1.9%) and rim 3 (~2.5%). Thus, Al and Mn have further converse enrichment trends in zones a and b, while other elements do not show any differences (
Figure 4 and
Figure 5).
5. Supply of Fe2+ and HCO3− by Dissimilatory Iron Reduction
Another possible external source of seawater Fe
2+ would be from the benthic shuttle transport from shelf
[37][43] or terrestrial input
[38][44]. Considering the widely distributed Xiamaling IF covering the whole Yanliao Basin, the benthic shuttle transport is also an unlikely contributor. Therefore, the most possible source should be biologically recycled continental Fe, which has been suggested as a major component in the 2.5 Ga Dales Gorge member IF
[39][45]. Considering the still low oxidation levels in Mesoproterozoic atmosphere and ocean
[40][41][46,47], the iron cycle in the ocean might be comparable to that of the terminal Archaean
[34][36]. No matter which reason takes over, a ferruginous-dominated ocean during the Xiamaling Formation has already been confirmed
[6][31][32][34][42][43][6,33,34,36,42,48]. Thus, Fe
2+ would not be the limiting factor.
Since the Xiamaling siderites are mainly interbedded with shale or sandstone as layers or nodules, the capture of organic-sourced HCO
3− by Fe
2+ probably mainly occurred in pore water. Therefore, the siderite should be formed in a semi-closed to closed pore water conditions with Fe
2+ and HCO
3− supplies from seawater through DIR. A relatively closed pore water condition could also prevent the combination of HCO
3− with Ca
2+ to form calcite crystals, which, nevertheless, has a higher growth rate than siderite
[19]. During the deposition period of the Xiamaling IF, DIR might have been quite vigorous, and could have reduced almost all the sinking iron-oxides into Fe
2+ to form siderite later
[6][7][34][6,7,36].
6. Fe-Bearing Mineral as a Nucleus
When the first two conditions have been met, the third requirement for siderite crystallization is a suitable nucleus, which can be a clastic particle (e.g., hematite, quartz, and feldspar) or even an organism remnant
[21]. Because Al mainly exists in clay minerals, it can only exist before the siderite crystallization, and cannot be brought in during the crystallization process. However, this nucleus has an Fe content (~36%) similar to siderite, which can be determined to be an iron-bearing mineral. Robust DIR can almost completely reduce the hematite that has a much higher Fe content (70%) than siderite. This nucleus does not show any enrichment of Si, so the possibility of ferric silicate can also be ruled out. Therefore, it is most likely to be a residual siderite crystal with some clay contamination.
In fact, the occurrence of residual siderite crystal in 1.4 Ga sediments should be common. Firstly, the already found ~1.45 Ga Sherwin Ironstone in North Australia
[10] and ~1.33 Ga Jingtieshan IF in Qilian
[8] are siderite-dominated IF. Manganiferous dolostones are also present in the Tieling Formation (~1.44 Ga) and Gaoyuzhuang Formation (~1.58 Ga)
[44][45][46][54,55,56]. These findings indicate that massive Fe and Mn deposits still existed in the Mesoproterozoic oceans but mainly in the form of carbonates. Secondly, there is a large unconformity between the Xiamaling and Tieling formations, indicating robust weathering and erosion of early sediments
[29][31]. In different outcrop section, almost all the weathering crusts at the bottom of the Xiamaling Formation have high Fe contents
[29][47][31,57]. The clastic materials such as sandstones and mudstones deposited above the crust are also rich in Fe
[29][47][31,57]. Thus, it is possible that previously deposited carbonate minerals were uplifted to the surface by regional tectonic movement, and entered into the ocean again. The siderite nuclei
found in this study provide mineral inclusion evidence for a possible siderite oxidation event at 1.4 Ga.
7. Growth of the Siderite Crystal
Different from the crystals in the siderite sample with a size around 50 μm, the siderite crystal in the shale sample can grow to 200 μm (
Figure 4). Euhedral rhombohedral characteristic of the scanned siderite further indicates a weakly alkaline and closed water condition, which thereby allows the siderite to slowly grow as euhedral crystals
[48][58]. However, unlike the uniform distribution of Fe on the crystal surface, the depletion of Mn and Zn in rim 2 might be caused by the failure to replenish them in a timely manner as the ions were deposited in a closed environment. In rim 3, the re-enriched Mn and Zn might be from the ferruginous pore water, which had limited Zn
2+ and Mn
2+. Then, the contents of Mn, Zn, and Fe underwent sharp decreases, while Al and Si contents increased conversely (
Figure 4 and
Figure 5), indicating a relatively open pore water with more clay and silicate minerals. In sum, the rim
in this crystal should be an indicator for the varied pore water conditions which changed from closed into semi-closed (
Figure 6).
Figure 6. Conceptual model illustrating the crystallization and grow process of the studied siderite from the Xiamaling iron formation. The dot and dash circle in the pore water square represent closed and semi-closed condition, respectively.