types and physical properties of igneous rocks of … · forms the sea of japan ... types and...

ISSN 1819�7140, Russian Journal of Pacific Geology, 2014, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 104–115. © Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2014.Original Russian Text © S.N. Kononets, V.T. S’edin, T.A. Kharchenko, M.G. Valitov, L.A. Izosov, 2014, published in Tikhookeanskaya Geologiya, 2014, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 39–52.

104

INTRODUCTION

The island under study is located in Peter the GreatBay, which sweeps the coasts of southern Primorye. Itforms part of the Empress Eugenie Archipelago thatstretches from the Muraviev–Amurskii Peninsula tothe southwest. In terms of tectonics, the archipelagocomprises a marine extension of the Murav’evskiihorst–anticlinorium [5] confined by the Murav’evskiiand Artemovskii faults [4, 11]. The base of the horst–anticlinorium is formed by granite and mafic domes,which were identified based on the geomorphologicaldata of S.M. Taschi (1991) and A.A. Gavrilov [19] andalso based on the geophysical data of S.N. Kononets(1991). Popov Island is one of the large islands of theEmpress Eugenie Archipelago.

Peter the Great Bay comprises an area of the junc�tion of three geostructural units [8, 9, 13] and repre�sents a transitional zone between the continent andthe oceanic lithosphere of the deep depression thatforms the Sea of Japan [2, 11, 12]. This was an area ofstructural and compositional transformation of themature continental crust caused by the Late Mesozoicand Cenozoic deformation, which created the modernbasin of the Sea of Japan [4, 12, 14].

The integrated geological and geophysical study ofthis zone is very important for establishing the mecha�nisms of the formation of the Sea of Japan and under�

standing the relationships between the terrestrial andmarine structures. In order to solve this problem, dur�ing the past several years, the Pacific OceanologicalInstitute has carried out a detailed geophysical pro�gram comprising bathymetric, seismic, gravimetric,and magnetic surveys in the territory of the economiczone of the Russian Federation, including the shelfzone of Peter the Great Bay. The results of this pro�gram have been published in several papers mainlyregarding the deep structure of this area [2, 3].

The question of the correlation between the terres�trial and shelf geological structures currently remainsunanswered. The accurate geologic interpretation ofthe gravity and magnetic data acquired for the waterarea of Peter the Great Bay is needed to address thisissue. As is well known, the physical properties of therocks are a “key” for the interpretation of the geophys�ical anomalies. This became the basis for a targetedpetrophysical study of the rocks that compose theislands and the margins of Peter the Great Bay. PopovIsland was chosen for study due to the distinctive vari�ability of the geologic complexes that form it.

Regardless of the long history of the geological sur�vey of the Primorye Territory, the geology and geo�physics of Popov Island were poorly studied. The maingeological mapping on a 1 : 200000 scale was carriedout on this territory back in the 1950s (B.I. Vasil’ev,

Types and Physical Properties of Igneous Rocks of Popov Islandin Peter the Great Bay of the Sea of Japan

S. N. Kononets, V. T. S’edin, T. A. Kharchenko, M. G. Valitov, and L. A. IzosovV.I. Il’ichev Pacific Oceanological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Far East Branch (TOI DVO RAN),

ul. Baltiyskaya 43, Vladivostok, 690041 Russiae�mail: [email protected]

Received December 27, 2012

Abstract—This paper presents the results of geological and petrophysical research carried out on PopovIsland by the Pacific Oceanological Institute of the Far East Branch of the Russian academy of Sciences dur�ing 2003–2009. As a result, 7 types of rocks were identified. Their density and magnetic susceptibility havebeen determined. It was established that the rock types are clearly differentiated with respect to their physicalparameters. The identified relationship allows one to use these physical properties, first of all, for the geolog�ical interpretation of the gravity and hydromagnetic survey carried out in the surrounding water area of Peterthe Great Bay and, secondly, as an additional indicator for igneous rock typification on other islands of theregion. Such comprehensive and integrated research was carried out for the first time in this area. The resultsobtained are important for solving the problem of the structural, compositional, and genetic relationshipsbetween the terrestrial and marine structures at the junction zone between the Japanese Basin and the adja�cent continent.

Keywords: geological structure, igneous rocks, physical properties, density, magnetic susceptibility, PopovIsland, Sea of Japan

DOI: 10.1134/S1819714014020031

RUSSIAN JOURNAL OF PACIFIC GEOLOGY Vol. 8 No. 2 2014

TYPES AND PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF IGNEOUS ROCKS 105

1958). At the beginning of the 21st century, the geol�ogy of this area was mapped at the same scale as part ofthe GDP�200 Project. According to the results ofthese works, the island comprises three geologicalunits of Late Permian age (Fig. 1): (1) the granitoids ofthe Sedankinskii Complex; (2) the undivided Vladi�vostokskaya Formation; (3) the gabbroids of theMurav’evskii Complex. Later, L.A. Izosov suggestedsubsuming rocks of the Vladivostokskaya Formationinto the Barabashskaya Formation [10]. The territoryof the island has been covered by airborne gamma�rayspectrometry and an airborne magnetic survey on ascale of 1 : 25000 to 1 : 50000 (A.V. Zhukovskaya,1988).

In 2003, while in the process of an active geophys�ical survey in the waters of Peter the Great Bay, theTOI DVO RAN launched a detailed geological andgeophysical survey of Popov Island. One of the tasks ofthis survey was matching the results of the marine sur�vey with the land�based geologic and geophysical sur�veys to develop a uniform tectonic configuration of thejunction zone between the geologic structures ofSikhote Alin and the Sea of Japan.

The geophysical survey comprised the following: asurface magnetic survey on a scale of 1 : 10000, in�situmagnetic susceptibility measurements of the rocks ofthe island, and electrical profiling using a vertical elec�trical sounding method. A magnetic anomaly map wasproduced and an analysis of the magnetic properties ofthe igneous rocks was carried out [1] based on the sur�vey results.

A detailed geological study of the island was per�formed simultaneously with the geophysical survey. Itwas started by A.A. Garvilov and V.V. Lepeshko, andfrom 2005 passed on to V.T. S’edinii and L.A. Izosov.This work resulted in a geologic base map [6], a1 : 50000 scale map of the geologic formations [10],and a 1 : 10000 scale schematic space photogeologicalmap (Fig. 2). The new data significantly update theearlier geologic maps [15, 20]. A representative collec�tion of igneous rock samples was compiled in thecourse of the geologic studies for the purpose of mea�surements of their physical properties.

The main goal of the present study is to establishcorrelational relationships between the physical prop�erties of igneous rocks of various types and their struc�tural and textural properties and composition. Theserelationships would provide grounds for the geologicinterpretation of the gravity and hydromagnetic surveyfor the Peter the Great Bay area and could be later usedas an additional indicator for the igneous rock typifi�cation on islands of Peter the Great Bay. The results ofthese studies became the basis for the present publica�tion.

RESEARCH METHODS

The geological survey was conducted along a sys�tematic traverses following a grid corresponding to1 : 10000 scale mapping. Detailed studies were carriedout at coastal rock exposures, bedrock outcrops in theinner parts of the island, and geological pits andtrenches excavated by our predecessors. Particularattention was paid to the contacts between variousrock types in order to identify their relationships andrelative ages. GPS navigators were used for determin�ing the coordinates of the observation points. The sur�vey results were plotted on a topographic base usingspace and photographic images of the studied area.

Samples for the petrophysical analysis were col�lected from fresh unaltered rocks, which could havebecome reference samples for certain types of igneousrocks [16]. In addition, their altered varieties were alsosampled (usually the contact zones of different rocktypes) in order to establish the changes in their physi�cal properties as a response to certain secondary trans�formations of the primary rock. All the identified rocktypes are represented by statistically significant sam�ples.

Petrophysical study. The density (σ) and magneticsusceptibility (χ) were determined following a stan�dard procedure [7, 18].

The measurement errors of the physical parameterswere estimated based on the results of second (control)measurements of the properties for 3–5% of the totalnumber of samples in the collection. The standarddeviation for the density determinations comprised0.026 g/cm3. The average relative measurement errorof the magnetic susceptibility varied depending on themagnetization of the sample in the 3–10% range. Theabove data show that all the physical properties weredetermined with sufficient accuracy for a petrophysi�cal study.

The density and magnetic susceptibility determi�nations were carried out by T.A. Kharchenko in a lab�oratory environment. A total number of 363 sampleswere subject to measurements.

RESULTS

Geological survey. As a result of this work, a sche�matic space photogeological map of the island wasproduced on a 1 : 10000 scale (Fig. 2). Not only thegeological survey results but also space and photo�graphic images with a sufficient level of detail (Googlemaps) were used for generating the map. The stratifiedrocks belong to the Barabashskaya Formation of theMidiidkii Epoch, which forms an effusive (mafic) unitin the northern part of the island (P2br1), and a tuff andeffusive andesitic unit in the southern part of the island(P2br2). The intrusive and subvolcanic mafic rocksbelong to the Murav’evskii Complex, and the felsicrocks pertain to the Sedankinskii Complex [9, 10].

106


KONONETS et al.

132°00′K1–2

P2vl2δπ1P2s δ2P2s

γδ2P2s

P2cnT1–2

K1

αPbr

δπ3K2k

γ3P2s

P1–2ps

βP2m

K1–2

K1–2

K1

P2vl2

P2vl1

P2vl1

P2vl1

P2vl

P2vl

vl1

δ1P2s

γδ2P2s

γδ2P2s

γδ2P2s

γδ2P2s

P2cn

T1–3

αP2v

αP2v

λP2v

λP2v

λP2v

λP2v

T1

T2

T1–2

P1–2ps

δ1P2s

γ2P2s

λPbr

γ2P2s

P2br

γ2P2s

γ2P2sνP2m

QIII–IV

QII–IV

Vladivostok

Nakhodka

PRC

RF

S E A OF J A P A N

Japan

Peter the

Am

ur

De�Friz Peninsula

Muraviev–Amurskii

Us

su

ri

Ba

y

Russky Island

Reineke Island

Rikorda Island

Peninsula

Popov Island

Popov Island

Vladivostok

Great Bay

Ba

y

Ugl

ovoi

Bay

131°45′

43°00′ 43°00′

43°15′

131°45′ 132°00′

M

A

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16a

bc

Fig. 1. Geological map of the Muraviev–Amurskii Peninsula and the adjoining territories. Fragment of the state geological mapon a 1 : 200000 scale (sheets K�52�XII and K�53�VII, following T.K. Kutub�Zade et al., 2002 with some generalization by theauthors).(1–6) Permian volcano�sedimentary sequence: (1) Pospelovskaya Formation (P1–2ps), (2–4) Vladivostokskaya Formation:(2) Lower subformation of the Vladivostokskaya Formation (P2vl1), (3) Upper subformation of the Vladivostokskaya Formation(P2vl2), (4) Vladivostokskaya Formation, undivided (P2vl), (5) Barabashskaya Formation, undivided (P2br), (6) ChandalazskayaFormation, undivided (P2cn); (7–8) subvolcanic rocks of the Barabashskii and Vladivostokskii Complexes of basalt–andesite–rhyolite: (7) Rhyolite intrusions (λP2br, λP2vl), (8) Andesite extrusions; (9–12) Intrusive rocks: (9) Gabbro and diabase of theMurav’evskii Complex (νP2m, βP2m), (10) Diorites of the Sedankinskii Complex (δ1P2s) and diorite porphyries of the Sedankin�skii and Kamishlovskii Complexes (δπ1P2s, δπ3K2k), (11) Granodiorites of the Sedankinskii Complex (γδ2P2s), (12) Granites ofthe Sedankinskii Complex (γ2P2s, γ3P2s); (13) Triassic sedimentary rocks (T1–3); (14) Carboniferous coal�bearing rocks (K1–2);(15) Quaternary deposits (QII–IV); (16) tectonic faults: (a) exposed, (b) thrusts, (c) inferred (M—Murav’evskii fault, followingR.G. Kulinich, A—Artemovskii fault).



The data analysis showed that the geologicalframework of Popov Island comprises mainly igneousrocks of various compositions (from mafic to felsic).Sedimentary formations here play a notably subordi�nate role.

Based on the structural, textural, and chemicalcharacteristics, 7 types of igneous rocks were identifiedon Popov Island: (1) leucocratic medium�grainedgabbro; (2) melanocratic gabbroids; (3) grey, pinkishgrey, and greyish pink medium�grained granitoids;(4) pink leucocratic granite porphyry, felsic effusiverocks; (6, 7) volcanic units of the Barabashskaya For�mation [17].

The rocks of the first type are the most abundant onthe island (Fig. 2). The leucocratic gabbro represents acompletely devitrified light grey or greenish grey rockwith a well�defined crystalline texture. The crystalsizes are mainly in the 2–5 mm range, while otherdimensions are quite rare. One of the boulders in thedeluvium in the northeastern part of the island is com�posed of coarse�grained gabbro with crystal sizes up to2.5 cm. The leucocratic gabbro is one of the oldestrocks on Popov Island. They are cut (veins, smalldykes) by melanocratic gabbroids and are incorpo�rated into them as xenoliths. The leucocratic gabbrocontains features of interaction with granitic magma(rock types 3 and 4); in some cases, they contain apo�physes of granite, multiple aplitic veinlets (7 cm), feld�spar porphyroblasts, and plagioclase albitization. Adefinite pink tint is sometimes identified for the gab�bros of this type, which also suggests it was affected bygranitic magma. Coastal exposures on the western andthe eastern parts of the island contain residual gab�broids within felsic volcanics. The described relation�ships between the leucocratic gabbro and the rocks oftypes 2 to 5 indicate that the gabbro is the oldest of theigneous complexes among types 1–5.

The rocks of the second type (melanocratic gab�broids) are abundant in the northern part of the island.In the current study, by the term “melanocratic gab�broids” we imply a group of rocks with various texturaland structural properties that have been formed fromone mafic magma that crystallized under different P–T conditions. In contract to leucocratic, melanocraticgabbroids comprise a more diverse group of rocks withdifferent structural and textural parameters. There arevarieties with a visible crystalline texture (fine�grainedgabbro) and aphanitic (microgranular gabbro, doler�ites, and basalts). There are gradual transitions in thegrainsize distribution within this type of rocks. Mel�anocratic gabbroids compose numerous small dykesand veinlets in the medium�grained gabbro and alsonear�surface intrusions and lava flows in differentparts of the island. Lava flows are observed only on thenorthern part of the island. They likely formed as aresult of the opening of shallow mafic magmaticchambers by the northeast trending deep�seatedMurav’evskii fault. The following facts provide evi�

dence for the timing of the formation of the secondrock type: (1) they cut rocks of the first type (leuco�cratic gabbro) and include the latter as xenoliths; (2) in

P2br1

νP2m1

λP2s2

γπP2s2

λ β

γδP2s1

102

50

80

25137.6

9865

70

64

66.4

120.5

Q

1 2

a b

1 2 3

4 5 6

7 8 9

10 11 12

13 14 15

16 17

0 500 m

Q

Q

Q

Q

Q

P2br1

P2br1

P2br1

P2br2

P2br2

P2br2

P2br2

νP2m1

νP2m1

νP2m1

νP2m1

νP2m1

νP2m2

νP2m2νP2m1

νP2m2νP2m1

νP2m1νP2m2

λP2s2

λP2s2

λP2s2

γP2s1

γP2s1

γP2s1

γP2s1

γP2s1

γπP2s2

γπP2s2

γπP2s2

γπP2s2

γπP2s2

λP2s2

25

β λι

70

80

65

λ117

58.4

35

30

35

64

1 2

1 21

2

70

Fig. 2. Schematic space photogeological map of PopovIsland (by L.A. Izosov and V.T. S’edin).

(1–2) Barabashskaya Formation: (1) Effusive unit (P2br1):basalts, dolerites, microgranular gabbro, fine�grained gab�bro; (2) Tuff–effusive unit (P2br2): andesites, basalts, pse�phitic mafic tuff, ruby tuffaceous conglomerate;(3) unconsolidated Quaternary deposits (Q); (4) Mu�rav’evskii Complex: leucocratic medium�grained gab�bro(νP2m1) and melanocratic gabbroids (νP2m2);

(5⎯7) Sedankinskii Complex: (5) Granodiorite (γδP2s2),

(6) Medium�grained granite (γP2s1), (7) pink granite por�

phyry (γπP2s2); (8) Felsic volcanics: lavas, extrusions and

subvolcanic bodies (γP2s2); (9) dykes of diabase (β), aplite(ι and rhyolite (λ); (10–13) Strike and dip: (10 ) of layers(a) inclined, (b) vertical), (11) of igneous contacts((a) inclined, (b) vertical)), (12) flow structures, (13) frac�ture zones ((a) inclined, (b) vertical)); (14) Geologicalboundaries ((1) mapped; (2) inferred); (15) Faults((1) mapped; (2) inferred)); (15) Ring structures of ter�rain; (17) Major ring structures mapped on space images.

100.1

108


KONONETS et al.

the northeastern part of the island (area of the 100.1 melevation point), they rest on a higher elevation andare less weathered than the rocks of the third type (greymedium�grained granitoids); (3) rocks of the fourthtype (pink granites) form multiple veinlets (up to10 cm thick) in melanocratic gabbroids (western coastof the Alexeev Inlet); (4) rocks of the fifth type (felsicvolcanics) overlie the melanocratic gabbroids, whichare found as relicts within the felsic volcanics on thecoast of the Stark Strait and on the west coast of thenorthwestern part of Popov Island. It is important tonote that melanocratic gabbroids are found in thesame parts of the island as the leucocratic gabbros (ofthe first type) and constitute the same morphologicalstructures. The rocks of these two types are spatiallyclosely related and possibly represent two stages ofmafic magmatism of Popov Island [17]. There wasmost likely a large time gap between the formation ofthe leucocratic gabbros and the melanocratic gab�broids. This is indicated by the presence of a thin grav�elstone layer that overlies the leucocratic gabbro in thearea of Cape Markovskii. The rocks of the first andsecond types can be somewhat conventionallyassigned to the gabbroids of the Murav’evskii Complexof the Muraviev–Amurskii Peninsula. We combine therocks of the first and second types into a gabbro–basaltformation [10].

The rocks of the third type (grey and pinkish greymedium�grained granitoids) are also widely occurring.They form part of the geological structure of thenortheastern region of the island and, together withthe pink granites, completely compose the southeast�ern region of the island (Fig. 2). Based on the geophys�ical survey data (aerial magnetic surveying and mag�netic profiling by L.A. Bessonov and S.N. Kononets),the rocks of the third type compose the central part ofthe island that is covered by alluvial deposits. Accord�ing to the relationships described above, the greymedium�grained granitoids are younger than the leu�cocratic gabbro (type 1) and at the same time are olderthan the melanocratic gabbroids (type 2). The rocks ofthe third type are also older than the rocks of the fourthtype (pink granites) and the fifth type (felsic volca�nics), which incorporate medium�grained granitexenoliths (Stark Strait, observations on ReinekeIsland). Pink granites often form dykes of variousthicknesses that cut the medium�grained granitoids.In addition, in the cases of coexisting pink and greygranites, the grey ones are always altered, as a result ofwhich the medium�grey granitoids obtain a pinkishand pinky red tint. Medium�grained granites oftencontain xenoliths of more mafic rocks (granodiorites,diorites, gabbros), which likely comprise autholithsand represent products of deep�level differentiation ofthe primary granitic melt.

Rocks of the fourth type (pink leucocratic graniteporphyries) are less common on Popov Island than thefirst three types. They are found in the southwestern,southeastern, and southern parts of the island and

occur widely only in the last two regions. The granitesof this type are characterized by a prominent pinkcolor of various shades. These are near�surface grani�toids with a well�defined porphyry texture and some�times even a glassy matrix. In the Pogranichnaya Inletarea (southeastern part of the island), there is a directtransition from the pink granite porphyries to felsicvolcanics. Usually, the pink granites are associatedwith numerous cross cutting thin (thickness up to 1 m)dykes and veins of pink and pinkish grey aplites. Pinkgranites are one of the youngest rocks of the PopovIsland. They cut the rocks of types 1–3 and affectthem. The rocks of the third and fourth types (grey andpink granitoids) most likely correspond to theSedankinskii intrusive Complex (followingT.K. Kutub�Zade et al., 2002).

The rocks of the fifth type (felsic volcanics) are alsocharacterized by a limited distribution on PopovIsland. They are found only in the northeastern andnorthwestern parts of the island (Fig. 2). The felsicvolcanics comprise aphyric, sometimes silicified, vit�reous rocks of various colors (light grey, ash grey, lightbeige, beige pink, and pink). They form flows andsmall lava fields, which are usually conformably over�lay the paleoterrain. The rocks of this type are theyoungest in the northern part of the island. They over�lie the rocks of first and second types, which createresidual hills composed of gabbroids. They also con�tain granite xenoliths (coast of the Stark Strait). In thenorthwestern part of the island, the felsic volcanicsform a paleocaldera (Popov Mountain area), which atone time was a center of lava outflow. It is noteworthythat felsic volcanics are not commonly found in thoseparts of the island where there are pink granite por�phyries and vice versa. It is possible that they arecomagmatic and both correspond to one stage of felsicmagmatism of Popov Island. We combine the rocks oftypes 3–5 (medium�grained granitoids, pink graniteporphyries, and felsic volcanics) of Popov Island intoa granite–rhyolite formation [10] and subsume themto the Sedankinskii Complex.

The rocks of the Barabashskaya Formation (types 6and 7 of igneous rocks) are of limited occurrence(Fig. 2). They form part of the geological structure ofthe most northerly and southern parts of the island(Likander Peninsula and the adjoining territory). Inthe northern part of the island, the rocks of the Bara�bashskaya Formation comprise only mafic varieties(6 types of rocks), which compose short hyalobasalticlava flows, their feeders, and near�surface intrusions(fine�grained and microgranular gabbro and doler�ites). In the southern part of the island, the rocks of theBarabashskaya Formation compose a volcano�sedi�mentary sequence that consists mainly of volcanicrocks (dominantly andesites (7 types of rocks)). Thesedimentary rocks (gravelstones, conglomerates) ofthe volcano�sedimentary sequence are meager andlikely correspond to volcano slope detritus (lahars). Incontrast to basalts, the effusive rocks of the andesitic



unit of the Barabashskaya Formation are intensivelyaltered (saussuritization of plagioclase, carbonatiza�tion, cloritization, silicification). Hematitization isanother type of secondary alteration characteristic ofthe andesitic unit of Popov Island, which is observed inthe western part of the Likander Peninsula. It is causedby high�temperature heating of hard rocks in an aerialenvironment during subsequent eruptions and is typi�cal for the near�vent parts of the volcanic edifice. Tak�ing in mind the composition of the BarabashskayaFormation in various parts of the island, we subdividethem into the effusive (mafic) unit and the tuff–effu�sive (andesitic) unit (Fig. 2). The rocks of the andesiticunit of the Barabashskaya Formation are most likelythe oldest igneous rocks on Popov Island. The volca�nics of this unit are intensively altered, sometimesfound as relicts (or pseudodykes?) within the pinkgranites (type 4), and are also cut by them. A directcontact between the andesitic unit and the other igne�ous rocks (types 1–3) was not established. However,observations on other islands (Reineke, Bolshoy Pelis,and Matveev islands) showed that the rocks of the

andesitic unit form the oldest igneous rock type in thewhole archipelago. They are cross cut by medium�grained gabbro and granitoids, as well as melanocraticgabbroids.

Petrophysical study. The statistical analysis of thepetrophysical data for all of the identified rock types ofPopov Island was based on histograms of the densityand magnetic susceptibility (Fig. 3) and the density–magnetic susceptibility correlation diagrams (Fig. 4,5). The rocks of mafic and intermediate compositionthat form a major part of the igneous complexes arecharacterized by reliable correlation (R = 0.98)between the average values of the physical parameters(Fig. 4, 5).

Leucocratic medium�grained gabbro (type 1 in thegeologic description) is represented by 70 samples.The histograms of σ and χ are characterized by amonomodal distribution (Fig. 3). Their density variesfrom 2.7 to 2.9 g/cm3 (σave = 2.808 g/cm3), while theirmagnetic susceptibility ranges from 2765 to 50000 ×10–6 SI units (χave = 18697 × 10–6 SI units, see the

Physical properties of igneous rocks of Popov Island

Types of igneous rocks,petrophysical groups

Geo

logi

cal

inde

x

Num

ber

of s

ampl

es Density (σ, g/cm3)Magnetic susceptibility

(χ, SI units)

averagemin–max

standard (S)

averagemin–max

standard (S)

Type I

Leucocratic m/g gabbro (Murav’evskii Complex) νP2m1 70 0.05 11645

Type II

Melanocratic gabbroids (Murav’evskii Complex) νP2m2 41 0.09 23178

Type III

M/g granites and granodiorites (Sedankinskii Complex)

γ�

γδP2s1 42 0.05 5500

Type IV

Pink granite porphyry(Sedankinskii Complex) γπP2s2 10 0.06 289

Type V

Felsic volcanics: rhyolites and rhyodacites (Sedankinskii Complex) λP2s2 34 0.05 2261

Type VI

Effusive (mafic) unit: basalts, dolerites, f/g gabbro, micro/g gabbro (Barabashskaya Formation)

P2br1 32 0.06 27270

Type VII

Tuff–effusive (andesitic) unit: andesites, basaltic andesites, basalts (Barabashskaya Formation)

P2br2 25 0.05 13766

2.8082.700–2.898�� 18697

2765–47976��

2.8912.748–3.150�� 49957

11585–114387��

2.6212.505–2.709�� 7393

2053–24427��

2.5672.459–2.636�� 247

52–801��

2.6072.465–2.660�� 1603

12–8946��

2.8842.759–3.06�� 54201

7672–128633��

2.7802.651–2.852�� 16116

257–49861��

110


KONONETS et al.

(a) (b)

Leucocratic gabbro

Melanocratic gabbroids

Mafic unit

Andesitic unit

Medium�grained granites

Felsic volcanics

χ, 10–6 SI units

N, %

10

0

10

0

30

20

10

0

70605040302010

0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000

1

2

3

4

νP2m1

P2br1

γ�γδP2s1

λP2s2

20

σ, g/cm3

30

20

10

0

30

20

10

0

30

30

20

10

0

2.44

2.48

2.52

2.56

2.60

2.64

2.68

2.72

2.76

2.80

2.84

2.88

2.92

2.96

3.00

3.04

3.08

1

1

12

2

2

3

3

4νP2m2

P2br2

Fig. 3. Histograms of the density (a) and magnetic susceptibility (b) distribution for igneous rocks of Popov Island. The digits ontop represent the numbers of modal intervals.



table). According to classification [18], these rockscorrespond to dense and magnetic. The density varia�tions are caused by different proportions of leucocraticand melanocratic components in the samples of thistype, which is reflected in the ratios of the plagioclaseand mafic minerals in them. These variations arerelated to the crystallization and differentiation pro�

cesses. Weakly magnetic samples (χ < 5000 × 10–6 SIunits) and highly magnetic ones (χ > 30000 × 10–6 SIunits) represent leucocratic gabbro modified by gran�itization in the first case and saturation with aphaniticmafic components in the second case. The density–magnetic susceptibility correlation diagram (Fig. 4)displays the data points of a leucocratic gabbro clusterin one area (I) comprising several fields. Field I�1defines the primary (least altered) rocks of this type,which compose the central part of the largest leuco�cratic gabbro massif located in the southwestern partof Popov Island (Fig. 2). The degree of magnetizationremains practically constant within this field. Theaverage density for this field comprises 2.84 g/cm3,while the average magnetic susceptibility is 9320 ×10⎯6 SI units, which corresponds to dense and mag�netic rocks [18].

The increase in the degree of magnetization of theleucocratic gabbro is caused by the intensive alterationof these rocks by the II stage magmatic phases (mel�anocratic gabbro). The most intensively reworkedrocks fall into field I�2 of the diagram, which containshighly magnetic samples (χ = 30000–50000 × 10–6 SIunits) collected from the northern part of the Zapad�naya Inlet. Field I�3 characterizes the secondaryquartz–magnetite mineralization of this type of rocks(area of the 98.3 m elevation point) and corresponds to

(a)

(b)

σ, g/cm3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

II�1

II�2

I�3

I�2, II�1

II, VI

VII

M

20�3�120�3

58�7 Y = 0

.09l

n(X) +

1.9

3.2

3.1

3.0

2.9

2.8

2.7

2.610 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000

M

M

I

I�1

χ, 10–6 SI units

9

10

11

V�2

Y = 0

.09l

n(X) +

1.92.9

2.8

2.7

2.6

2.5

2.410 100 1000 10000 100000

V�1

IV

V III

Fig. 4. Diagrams of the density–magnetic susceptibilitycorrelation for igneous rocks of Popov Island: (a) for leu�cocratic and melanocratic gabbroids of the Murav’evskiiComplex and the Barabashskaya Formation; (b) formedium�grained granitoids, pink granites, and felsic vol�canics of the Sedankinskii Complex.(a) (1) Leucocratic gabbro; (2) Melanocratic gabbroids;(3) Mafic unit of the Barabashskaya Formation;(4) Andesitic unit of the Barabashskaya Formation;(5) Samples with magnetite veinlets; (6) Areas of cluster�ing of different rock types (I—leucocratic gabbro, II—melanocratic gabbroids, III—medium�grained granites,IV—pink granite porphyry, V—felsic volcanics, VI—mafic unit of the Barabashskaya Formation, VII—andes�itic unit of the Barabashskaya Formation); (7) Areas ofclustering; (8) Average value line.(b) (9) Medium�grained granitoids; (10) Pink granite por�phyry; (11) Felsic volcanics.The large points mark the average values.

σ, g/cm3

χ, 10–6 SI units

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

IV

II, VI

VII

Y = 0.09ln(X) + 1.9

3.0

2.4

I2.9

2.8

2.7

2.6

2.5

V III

ab

b1b2

V

ab

ab

ab

ab

b

a

Fig. 5. Summary diagram for the density–magnetic sus�ceptibility correlation for the igneous rocks of PopovIsland(1–6) (a) Areas of data point clustering. (b) Average values:(1) leucocratic gabbro (I); (2) melanocratic gabbroids(II b1) and the mafic unit of the Barabashskaya Formation(VI b2); (3) andesitic unit of the Barabashskaya Formation(VII); (4) medium�grained granites (III); (5) pink graniteporphyry (IV), (6) felsic volcanics (V); (7) Average valueline.

112


KONONETS et al.

an increase in magnetization (χ = 70000–100000 ×10–6 SI units). Individual sample points (samples P20�3,P20�3�1, P58�7) fall out of the leucocratic gabbro fieldand are characterized by elevated σ and χ values. Theycomprise xenoliths of leucocratic gabbro in melano�cratic gabbro (area of the 100.1 m elevation point).The χ and χ values in this case seem logical, becausethe fine�grained gabbro hosting xenoliths has elevatedσ and χ values.

The melanocratic gabbroids are represented by41 samples. The histograms of σ and χ are character�ized by a multimodal distribution (Fig. 3), which likelyreflects the significant dispersion of the physical prop�erties of various rocks of this type, which include fine�grained and microgranular gabbro, dolerites, and dol�erite–basalts. The modes of density and magnetic sus�ceptibility do not always correlate. The density of themelanocratic gabbroids varies from 2.74 to 3.14 g/cm3,while the magnetic susceptibility ranges from 10000 to115000 × 10–6 SI units. These rocks correspond to thehighly dense and highly magnetic group [18]. The bulkof the samples correspond to mode 3 (σ = 2.84–2.94 g/cm3; χ = 35000–60000 × 10–6 SI units), theaverage values of which (σave = 2.89 g/cm3; χave =50000 × 10–6 SI units) fall into the same intervals. Thefirst modes in the diagram characterize the least dense(σ = 2.76–2.8 g/cm3 and 2.8–2.82 g/cm3) and leastmagnetic (χ = 10000–20000 and 20000–35000 ×10⎯6 SI units) rock samples. These properties are mostlikely caused by the high degree of secondary alter�ation. The fourth modes of σ and χ do not correlatewith each other, because not all the samples with highdensity have a high degree of magnetization. The dia�gram (Fig. 4) displays the clustering of the data pointsof the melanocratic gabbroids in one area (II). Thedispersion of the data points within this areareflects the variations in the amount of mafic andmagnetic minerals in these samples. Some points(fields II�1, II�2) fall out of this area and display signif�icant deviations of σ and χ from the average values.Field II�1 characterizes low�density samples collectedfrom tectonic zones and contacts between melano�cratic gabbroids and felsic volcanics. This is caused bysecondary silicification, granitization of the rocks, andby weathering processes. Field II�2 comprises samplescollected in the northeastern part of the island (eleva�tion 100.1 m). They are composed of virtually unal�tered fine�grained gabbro with a maximum content ofmafic clinopyroxene detected in this rock.

The area of melanocratic gabbroids in the diagram(II) is shifted upward diagonally relative to the leuco�cratic gabbro (I) and is located in the zone of highlydense and highly magnetic rocks. This is related to thelarge amount of mafic and magnetic minerals in mel�anocratic gabbroids compared to the leucocratic vari�eties, which reflects the parameters of their formation.Medium�grained leucocratic gabbro formed as a resultof the continuous processes of gravitational and crys�tallization differentiation of the mafic magma at stable

P–T conditions prompting regular distribution of theleucocratic and mafic and magnetic minerals. Mag�netic minerals enriched the deeper levels of the mag�matic chamber. Leucocratic gabbro likely representsthe upper part of a single mafic body, the lower levelsof which were not unsealed by erosion. The formationof melanocratic gabbroids took place in a lot less stableenvironment, when the next portion of the maficmagma easily reached the surface, producing near�surface intrusions (fine�grained and microgranulargabbros and dolerites) and even short hyalobasalticlava flows. In this setting, the mafic magma could nothave completely crystallized and differentiated, aswould have happened under stable P–T conditions. Itseems most likely that the conditions of the formationand the high density and magnetic susceptibility valuesof the melanocratic gabbroids indicate that these rocksmost closely correspond to the primary compositionof the mafic magma.

The granitoids of Popov Island: the medium�grained grey and pinkish grey granites (the type3 rocks) and pink granite porphyry (type 4) differ con�siderably in their physical properties (Table, Fig. 5).The medium�grained granites are represented by42 samples. The histogram of σ is characterized by amonomodal distribution (Fig. 3, A). The density of themedium�grained granites varies from 2.505 to2.709 g/cm3 (σave = 2.621 g/cm3). The magnetic sus�ceptibility of these rocks ranges from 2053 to 24428 ×10–6 SI units (χave = 7393 × 10–6 SI units, see thetable). They comprise both the low�magnetic andhigh�magnetic varieties. The histogram of the mag�netic susceptibility (Fig. 3, B) displays a bimodal dis�tribution, which suggests the different degrees of themagnetization of the rocks and their heterogeneouscomposition. The correlation diagram (Figs. 4, 5)shows that the data points of the medium�grainedgranites are arranged slightly to the right from the lineof the average values of the identified types of igneousrocks, where they form a well�defined cluster area(contour III). The significant variations of the physicalparameters within the limits of the contour indicatethat the rocks of this type include granitoids with vari�able silica contents: granites, granodiorites, and possi�ble diorites. It can be assumed that the composition ofthe primary magma for these rocks was not granitic butmost likely dioritic–granodioritic. The magma musthave formed as a result of the partial melting (anatexis)of the lower part of the continental crust.

Pink granite porphyries are represented by a smallnumber of samples, which are generally characterizedby constant density parameters (2.46–2.63 g/cm3) andmagnetic susceptibility (52–801 × 10–6 SI units).These rocks are almost completely nonmagnetic; themajority of the samples of this rock type have magneticsusceptibility lower than 500 × 10–6 SI units (χave =247 × 10–6 SI units). The average density values of thegranite porphyries (2.567 g/cm3) correspond to thenormal density for granites [18]. The σ and χ correla�



tion diagram (Fig. 4, 5) shows that the data points arearranged slightly to the left from the line of the averagevalues of the identified types of igneous rocks, wherethey form a well�defined cluster area (contour IV) inthe central part of the felsic volcanics area (V). Thepink granite porphyries are characterized by low den�sity and low magnetic susceptibility values (table;Fig. 4, B) and likely comprise the most felsic phases ofthe granite system.

The felsic volcanics are represented by 34 samples(5 rock types). Their density varies from 2.465 to2.66 g/cm3 (σave = 2.607 g/cm3), and the magneticsusceptibility ranges from 12 to 8946 × 10–6 SI units(χave = 1603 × 10–6 SI units, see the table). They com�prise practically nonmagnetic and low�magnetic vari�eties. The histogram of σ is characterized by a mono�modal distribution (Fig. 3, A), which suggests a ratherhomogeneous composition of the rocks. The histo�gram of the magnetic susceptibility (Fig. 3, B) clearlydemonstrates that the majority of these rocks arealmost completely nonmagnetic. The data points ofthe felsic volcanics cluster in two fields (V�1, V�2) inthe density–magnetic susceptibility correlation dia�gram (Fig. 4). One of them (V�1) is partially localizedwithin the area of pink granite porphyries, and the sec�ond one forms a contour located on the margins of thefields of granite porphyry and medium�grained gran�ites while combining them in a way (field V�2). FieldV�1 corresponds to the most felsic and altered (lowerpart of the field) varieties of this rock type. Field V�2most likely corresponds to rhyodacites and dacites.The individual points that fall into the extreme rightpart of this field characterize samples of felsic volca�nics with poor sulfide mineralization. The overlappingof areas of felsic volcanics (V) and pink granite por�phyries (IV) indicates that these rocks are most likelycomagmatic derivatives of single granitic magma,which complies with the geologic survey results. Inareas of more permeable rocks (northern part of PopovIsland), the magma easily achieved the surface form�ing felsic volcanics. In less permeable areas (southernpart of the island), it cooled down and crystallized inthe near�surface settings forming pink granite porphy�ries.

The mafic and andesitic rocks of the BarabashskayaFormation of Popov Island (rock types 6 and 7) differsignificantly in their physical properties (table). Thevolcanics of the mafic unit are represented by 32 sam�ples. Their density varies from 2.76 to 3.06 g/cm3

(σave = 2.884 g/cm3), while their magnetic susceptibil�ity ranges from 7672 to 128633 × 10–6 SI units (χave =54201 × 10–6 SI units, see the table). These rocks cor�respond to the highly dense and highly magnetic group[18]. The density histogram is characterized by amonomodal distribution (Fig. 3, A). The bulk of thesamples appear in the 2.86–2.96 g/cm3 interval, whichalso incorporates the average σ value. The magneticsusceptibility histogram (Fig. 3, B) has a diffusedappearance with three vague modes, which reflects the

extremely heterogeneous magnetic (ferromagnetic)mineral content in these rocks. The average value(χave = 54201 × 10–6 SI units) corresponds to the sec�ond mode. Mode 3 characterizes a rather significantgroup of samples with a high degree of magnetizationof 70000–100000 × 10–6 SI units. The σ and χ corre�lation diagram displays that the data points do notcluster into fields but fall into the area of melanocraticgabbroids (Fig. 4, 5). The average values for the maficunit and the melanocratic gabbroids practically agree(table, Fig. 5). This fact, along with other textural andstructural properties of the rocks of both types, sug�gests that the volcanics of the mafic unit of the Bara�bashskaya Formation and the melanocratic gabbroidshave a genetic affinity and correspond to one rocktype, as is suggested by V.T. S’edin.

The andesitic unit of the Barabashskaya Formationis represented by 25 samples. Their density varies from2.65 to 2.85 g/cm3 (σave = 2.78 g/cm3), while theirmagnetic susceptibility ranges from 257 to 50000 ×10⎯6 SI units (χave = 16116 × 10–6 SI units, see thetable). These rocks correspond to the dense and mag�netic group [18]. The σ and χ histograms display amonomodal distribution (Fig. 3). The majority of thesamples fall within intervals of σ from 2.76 to2.82 g/cm3 and χ from 5000 to 20000 × 10–6 SI units,which also contain their average values. The high aver�age values of the physical parameters (σave =2.78 g/cm3, χave = 16116 × 10–6 SI units) and theirposition on the diagram suggest that the andesitic rockunit is dominated by volcanics of intermediate andmafic composition (and transitional varieties). Thepresence within the andesitic unit of virtually non�magnetic rocks (Fig. 4, A), whose data points arelocalized in the extreme left part of the diagram, ismost likely caused by the loss of their magnetic prop�erties as a response to repeated high�temperature(~100°C) heating in an aerial environment in a near�vent setting. This confirms that the volcanoes of theandesitic unit formed on land in a long�lived volcanicsystem. In any case, the physical properties of the vol�canics of the andesitic unit show that they cannot beconsidered as analogues of the mafic unit of the Bara�bashskaya Formation. The density and magnetic sus�ceptibility of the latter are significantly higher (table;Fig. 4, A; Fig. 5) and do not correspond to theseparameters of the mafic rocks of the VladivostokskayaFormation and the Barabashskaya Formation(T.K. Kutub�Zade et al., 2002). It seems that the vol�canics of the mafic and andesitic units of the Bara�bashskaya Formation genetically comprise absolutelydifferent igneous rocks. The rocks of the andesitic unitrepresent an independent type of effusive rocks of theisland.

It is important to note that the study of the physicalproperties of the igneous rocks allowed clearing upsome debatable points of the geology Popov Island. Inparticular, the question of the genotypes of the volca�nics of the northern and southern parts of the island

114


KONONETS et al.

has been solved: these rocks were previously tradition�ally assigned to the Vladivostokskaya Formation(B.I. Vasil’ev, 1958; T.K. Kutub�Zade et al., 2002) [6,15, 20] and later to the Barabashskaya Formation [10].Our studies revealed that only the volcanics of theandesitic unit from the southern part of the island canbe related to the Vladivostokskaya (Barabashskaya?)Formation (Fig. 2). It is more logical to correlate therocks of the magic unit from the northern part of theisland with the melanocratic gabbroids.

CONCLUSIONS

The detailed geological survey of Popov Islandshowed that it is formed of all the types of igneousrocks established for the Muraviovskii horst–anticli�norium and the islands of its submerged extension.The density and magnetic susceptibility of all the typesof igneous rocks of Popov Island were first studiedbased on a representative collection of samples. Theanalysis of the data obtained allows drawing a numberof conclusions:

All the types of magmatic rocks identified duringthe geological survey are clearly differentiated basedon their physical parameters.

The petrophysical studies showed that the physicalproperties of the igneous rocks of Popov Island formtwo contrasting groups: the rocks of mafic (leucocraticgabbro, melanocratic gabbroids, mafics of the Bara�bashskaya Formation) and felsic series (granitoids andfelsic volcanics). Each of these two series represents aproduct of different magma: first, of the deep�levelmafic and, second, of the crust granitoid magma.

Taken together, these geological and petrophysicaldata give grounds for assuming that the formation ofthe identified types of igneous rocks occurred in sev�eral stages. In particular, there were two stages of maficmagmatism. During the first stage, the leucocraticgabbro formed, while, during the second stage, themelanocratic gabbroids and the rocks of the mafic unitof the Barabashskaya Formation formed. Felsic volca�nism also occurred in two stages. Medium�grainedgranitoids formed at the first stage, and pink graniteporphyries and felsic volcanics, at the second stage.The andesitic unit of the Barabashskaya Formationappeared as a result of an additional stage of magmaticactivity.

The igneous rocks of mafic composition assignedto the Murav’evskii Complex form two distinct groupsbased on their petrophysical properties: melanocraticgabbroids that are characterized by the highest valuesof σave = 2.89 g/cm3 and χave = 49957 × 10–6 SI units,and leucocratic gabbro that have lower parameters ofσave = 2.808 g/cm3 and χave = 18697 × 10–6 SI units.

The study of the physical properties of the effusivesequences of Popov Island, which were assigned to theBarabashskaya Formation by L.A. Izosov, confirms itsdivision into two units: a mafic unit with rocks charac�

terized by high density and magnetic susceptibility val�ues of σave = 2.884 g/cm3 and χave = 54201 × 10–6 SIunits, and an andesitic unit with lower values of σave =2.78 g/cm3 and χave = 16116 × 10–6 SI units. The sim�ilarity of the physical properties of the rocks of themafic unit of the Barabashskaya Formation and themelanocratic gabbroids suggests their genetic affinityand allows considering them as comagmatic. Theandesitic unit comprises an independent geologicalunit, and its effusive rocks represent derivatives of anautonomous magmatic chamber.

The rocks of the granitic series assigned to theSedankinskii Complex are divided into two groupsbased on their physical properties: (A) medium�grained granites and granodiorites characterized byelevated values of their density and magnetic suscepti�bility (σave = 2.621 g/cm3 and χave = 7393 × 10–6 SIunits); (B) pink granite porphyry with lower values oftheir physical parameters (σave = 2.567 g/cm3 andχave = 247 × 10–6 SI units).

The felsic volcanics are characterized by the largerdispersion of their physical parameters: the virtuallynonmagnetic and low�density rocks most likely corre�spond to rhyolites, and the more magnetic and denserrocks, to rhyodacites and dacites. The similarity of thephysical parameters of the felsic volcanics and pinkgranite porphyries suggests that these rocks are mostlikely comagmatic and formed from a single felsic(granitoid) magma. This is confirmed by the geologi�cal observations.

The most dense and magnetic varieties of igneousrocks are localized in the northern half of PopovIsland, which indicates the specific geological evolu�tion of this part of the island situated in the zone of theMurav’evskii deep�seated fault.

The determined differentiation of the igneousrocks of Popov Island in their density and magneticsusceptibility characteristics allow using these physicalproperties, first of all, for the geological interpretationof the gravity and hydromagnetic survey carried out inthe surrounding water area of Peter the Great Bay and,secondly, as an additional indicator for the typificationof the igneous rock on other islands of the region.

Such comprehensive and integrated research wascarried out for the first time in this area. The resultsobtained are important for solving the problem of thestructural, compositional, and genetic relationshipsbetween the terrestrial and marine structures at thejunction zone between the Japanese Basin and theadjacent continent.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was supported by the World Ocean fed�eral targeted program.

We thank P.S. Zimin (PhD in Geology) for assis�tance in the field work, A.N. Sokarev for technicalsupport of the laboratory studies and consultations,



and A.A. Gavrilov (PhD in Geology) andV.V. Lepeshko for the samples provided.

We are grateful to the reviewers for their criticalcomments and advice on eliminating them.

REFERENCES

1. E. A. Bessonova, V. M. Nikiforov, V. B. Zalishchak,S. A. Zverev, T. A. Emel’yanova, “Nature of magneticanomalies of the Popov, Rikord, an Reineke islands,Peter the Great Bay, Sea of Japan,” in Modern State andTrends in Environmental Changes of the Peter the GreatBay, Sea of Japan (GEOS, Moscow, 2008), pp. 340–355 [in Russian].

2. M. G. Valitov, S. N. Kononets, and R. G. Kulinich,Structure of the Earth’s crust in the junction zone of theSea of Japan basin with Southwestern Primorye, inOceanological Studies: Proceedings of Conference ofYouth Scientists, TOP DVO RAN, Vladivostok, Russia,2001 (Dal’nauka, Vladivostok, 2002), pp. 201–208 [inRussian].

3. M. G. Valitov, S. N. Kononets, and R. G. Kulinich,“Structural–density models of the Earth’s crust in thejunction zone between the Central basin and adjacentcontinent,” in Studies of the Russian Far East. Book 3.Geological and Geophysical Studies (Nauka, Moscow,2007), pp. 53–60 [in Russian].

4. M. G. Valitov, Extended Abstract of Candidate’s Dis�sertation in Geology and Mineralogy (Vladivostok,2009).

5. N. P. Vasil’kovskii, “Structure of the basement of Peterthe Great Bay,” in Main Features of Geological Structureof the Sea of Japan Floor (Nauka, Moscow, 1978),pp. 64–81 [in Russian].

6. A. A. Gavrilov, “Islands of Peter the Great Bay as struc�tural elements of the South Primorye areas of the Eur�asia–Sea of Japan junction zone,” in Modern State andTrends in Environmental Changes of Peter the Great Bay,Sea of Japan (GEOS, Moscow, 2008), Vol. 1 [in Rus�sian].

7. F. N. Efimov, Magnetic Susceptibility and Magnetic–Fractional–Mineralogical Study of Sedimentary Rocks(Nedra, Moscow, 1969) [in Russian].

8. L. A. Izosov, Yu. I. Konovalov, and T. A. Emel’yanova,Problems of the Geology and Diamond Potential of theContinent–Ocean Transition Zone (Japan and YellowSeas) (Dal’nauka, Vladivostok, 2000) [in Russian].

9. L. A. Izosov and Yu. I. Konovalov, The West Sikhote�Alin Marginal Continental Volcanic Belt and its TectonicPosition in the West Pacific Continent–Ocean TransitionZone (Dal’nauka, Vladivostok, 2005) [in Russian].

10. L. A. Izosov, V. T. S"edin, T. A. Emel’yanova,S. N. Kononets, M. G. Valitov, and K. Yu. Kramcha�nin, “New data on the magmatic complexes of Popovisland and some geological problems of Peter the GreatBay,” in Modern State and Trends in the EnvironmentalChanges of Peter the Great Bay, Sea of Japan (GEOS,Moscow, 2008), pp. 355–378 [in Russian].

11. R. G. Kulinich, Extended Abstract of Candidate’s Dis�sertation in Geology and Mineralogy (Vladivostok,1969).

12. R. G. Kulinich and M. G. Valitov, “Thicknesses andtypes of the crust beneath the Sea of Japan inferredfrom marine and satellite gravimetric investigations,”Russ. J. Pac. Geol. 5 (6), 481–491 (2011).

13. L. F. Nazarenko and V. A. Bazhanov, “Geology of thePrimorsky Krai. Part III. Main Features of Tectonicsand Evolution,” Preprint (DVNTs AN SSSR, Vladivos�tok, 1987).

14. V. M. Nikiforov, R. G. Kulinich, M. G. Valitov,I. V. Dmitriev, S. S. Starzhinskii, G. N. Shkabarnya,“Peculiarities of the fluid regime in the lithosphere ofthe junction zone between South Primorye and the Seaof Japan from the comprehensive geophysical data,”Russ. J. Pac. Geol. 7 (1), 46–55 (2013).

15. V. K. Popov, “Geological past and present of islands ofPeter the Great Bay,” in Far East Marine BiosphericReserved Area. Studies, Ed. by A. N. Tyurin (Dal’nauka,Vladivostok, 2004), Vol. 1 [in Russian].

16. M. V. Sukhin, Methodical Recommendation on the PEr�formance of Petrophysical Studies during GeologicalMapping Preprint (Khabarovsk, (1980).

17. V. T. S’’edin, “Magmatic complexes of Popov Island,Peter the Great Bay, Sea of Japan,” in Proceedings ofKosygin Readings on Tectonics and Deep Structure ofEast Asia, 2009, Khabarovsk, Russia (Khabarovsk,2009), pp. 232–236 [in Russian].

18. Physical Properties of Rocks and Mineral Resources(Petrophysics). A Handbook, Ed. by N. B. Dortman(Nedra, Moscow, 1992) [in Russian].

19. A. A. Gavrilov and E. A. Bessonova, “The islands of thePeter�the�Great Bay (the Sea of Japan) as a testing areafor the integrated geomorphologic and geology�geo�physical investigations,” in Regularities of Structure andEvolution of Geospheres: Reports of 7th InternationalConference, Vladivostok, Russia, 2005 (FEB RAS,Vladivostok, 2005), pp. 110–115.

20. V. Mikhailov, Geological Map of Vladivostok and itsEnvirons. Scale 1 : 125000, Ed. by A. Khanchuk (FarEastern Geol. Institute, Vladivostok, 1994).

Translated by E. Pelenkova

types and physical properties of igneous rocks of … · forms the sea of japan ... types and...

Documents