Garnet–orthopyroxene (GOPX) geothermometer: a comparative study

  • Harel ThomasEmail author
  • Haritabh Rana
  • Mohammad Shahid
Review Paper


The garnet–orthopyroxene pairs are commonly found in the assemblages of basic granulites/charnockite and hence are suitable for estimating equilibrium temperature of these metamorphic rocks. At present, there are many calibrations of garnet–orthopyroxene thermometer that may confuse geologists in choosing a reliable thermometer. To test the accuracy of the garnet–orthopyroxene thermometers, we have applied 14 models formulated by a number of workers since 1980 to date. We have collated 51 samples from the literature all over the world, which has been processed through the “Gt-Opx.EXE” software. Based on the present study, we have identified a set of the best among all the 14 models which were considered under this comparative study. We have concluded that the five garnet–orthopyroxene (Gt-Opx) thermometers are the most valid and reliable of this kind of thermometer: Aranovich and Berman (Am Mineral 82:345–353, 1997), Raith et al. (Earth Sci 73:211–244, 1983), Harley (Contrib Mineral Petrol 86:359–373, 1984), Nimis and Grütter (Contrib Mineral Petrol 159:411–427, 2010), and Sen and Bhattacharya (Contrib Mineral Petrol 88:64–71, 1984).


Garnet Orthopyroxene Exchange reaction Granulite Comparative study 



The authors thank the Head, Department of Applied Geology, Doctor Harisingh Gour Vishwavidyalaya, Sagar (M.P.) and the Department of Science and Technology, New Delhi, India, for providing facilities as including PURSE-Phase-II for conducting present research work. The authors express sincere thanks to the reviewer, Prof. Chun Ming Wu, Laboratory of Computational Geodynamics, The Graduate School, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China, for his critical and constructive reviews which significantly improved the focus and clarity of the manuscript.

Supplementary material

12517_2018_4060_MOESM1_ESM.docx (133 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 133 kb)


  1. Aranovich LY, Berman RG (1995) Solubility of Al2O3 in orthopyroxene equilibrated with almandine in the system Fe0-A1203-Si02. Current Research of the Geological Survey of Canada Paper, pp 271–278Google Scholar
  2. Aranovich LY, Berman RG (1997) A new garnet – orthopyroxene thermometer based on reversed Al2O3 solubility in FeO–Al2O3–SiO2 orthopyroxene. Am Mineral 82:345–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aranovich LY, Podlesskii KK (1989) Geothermobarometry of high grade metapelites: simultaneously operating reactions. In: Daly JS, Cliff RA, Yardley BWD (eds) Evolution of Metamorphic belts, Geol. Soc. Sp. Publ., vol 43. pp 45–61Google Scholar
  4. Berman RG, Aranovich LY (1996) Optimized standard state and solution properties of minerals. Contrib Mineral Petrol 126(1–2):1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bhattacharya A, Krishna Kumar KR, Raith M, Sen SK (1991) An improved set off a-x parameters for Fe-Mg-Ca garnets and refinements of the orthopyroxene - garnet theromometer and the orthopyroxene-garnet-plagioclase-quartz barometer. J Petrol 32:629–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bohlen SR (1987) Pressure-temperature-time paths and a tectonic model for the evolution of granulites. J Geol 95(5):617–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bohlen SR, Essene EJ (1980) Evaluation of coexisting garnet-biotite, garnet-clinopyroxene, and other Mg-Fe exchange thermometers in adirondack granulites. Geol Soc Am Bull 91(2):685–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carson CJ, Powell R (1997) Garnet–orthopyroxene geothermometry and geobarometry: error propagation and equilibration effects. J Metamorph Geol 15(6):679–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dahl PS (1980) The thermal-compositional dependence of Fe2+-Mg2+ distributions between coexisting garnet and pyroxene: applications to geothermometry. Am Mineral 65:852–866Google Scholar
  10. Dasgupta S, Sengupta P (1995) Ultrametamorphism in Precambrian granulite terranes: evidence from Mg-Al granulites and calc-silicate granulites of the Eastern Ghats, India. Geol J 30(3–4):307–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Essene EJ (1989) The current status of thermobarometry in metamorphic rocks. In: Daly SR, Cliff R (eds) Evolution of Metamorphic Belts, Special Paper-Geol. Soc, vol 43. pp 1–44Google Scholar
  12. Essene EJ, Peacor DR (1995) Clay mineral thermometry—a critical perspective. Clay Clay Miner 43:540–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fareeduddin, Shankar M, Basvalingu B, Janardhan AS (1994) Metamorphic P-T conditions of pelitic granulites and associated charnockites of Chinwali area, west of Delhi fold belt, Rajasthan. J Geol Soc India 43:169–178Google Scholar
  14. Ferry JM (1980) A comparative study of geothermometers and geobarometers in pelitic schists from south-central Maine. Am Mineral 65:720–732Google Scholar
  15. Fu B, Zheng YF, Li YL, Li SG (1998) Applications of garnet–clinopyroxene geothermometers to eclogite assemblages. Acta Mineral Acta 18:145–157Google Scholar
  16. Green DH, Ringwood AE (1967) An experimental investigation of the gabbro to eclogite transformation and its petrological applications. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 31(5):767–833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harley SL (1984) An experimental study of the partitioning of Fe and Mg between garnet and orthopyroxene. Contrib Mineral Petrol 86:359–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Harley SL (1989) The origins of granulites: a metamorphic perspective. Geol Mag 126(3):215–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hokada T (2001) Feldspar thermometry in ultrahigh-temperature metamorphic rocks: evidence of crustal metamorphism attaining~1100° C in the Archean Napier Complex, East Antarctica. Am Mineral 86(7–8):932–938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jahnson CA, Bohlen SR, Essene EJ (1983) An evaluation of garnet–clinopyroxene geothermometry in granulites. Contrib Mineral Petrol 84:191–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Joshi M, Thomas H, Sharma RS (1993) Granulite facies metamorphism in the Achaean gneiss complex from North– Central Rajasthan. Proc Nat Acad Sci India A 63(1):167–187Google Scholar
  22. Klemd R, Bröcker M (1999) Fluid influence on mineral reactions in ultrahigh-pressure granulites: a case study in the Śnieżnik Mts. (West Sudetes, Poland). Contrib Mineral Petrol 136(4):358–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lal RK (1993) Internally consistent recalibrations of mineral equilibria for geothermobarometry involving garnet - orthopyroxene – plagioclase - quartz assemblages and their application to the South Indian granulites. J Metamorph Geol 11:855–866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lee HY, Ganguly J (1984) Fe, Mg fractionation between garnet and orthopyroxene: experimental data and application. Geol Soc Am (abs), 52733 (Reprints)Google Scholar
  25. Lee HY, Ganguly J (1988) Equilibrium compositions of coexisting orthopyroxene and garnet: experimental determinations in the system FeO-MgO-Al2O3-SiO2, and applications. J Petrol 29:93–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mouri H, Guiraud M, Hensen BJ (1996) Petrology of phlogopite-sapphirine-bearing Al-Mg granulites from Ihouhaouene, In Ouzzal, Hoggar, Algeria: an example of phlogopite stability at high temperature. J Metamorph Geol 14(6):725–738Google Scholar
  27. Nimis P, Grütter H (2010) Internally consistent geothermometers for garnet peridotites and pyroxenites. Contrib Mineral Petrol 159(3):411–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nurminen KB, Ohta Y (1993) Granulites and garnet-cordierite gneisses from Dronning Maud land, Antarctica. J Metamorph Geol 11:691–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pal S, Bose S (1997) Mineral reactions and geothermobarometry in a suite ofgranulite facies rocks from Paderu, Eastern Ghats granulitebelt: A reappraisal of the P-T trajectory. lndian Acad Sci Earth Planet Sci 106(3):77–89Google Scholar
  30. Perchuk LL, Aranovich LY, Podlesskii KK, Lavrente’va IV, Korsakov LP, Berdnikov NV (1985) Precambrian granulites of the Aldan shield, eastern Siberia, USSR. J Metamorph Geol 3:265–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Perchuk LL, Lavrente’va IV (1990) Garnet-orthopyroxene and garnet-amphibole geothermobarometry: experimen-tal data and thermodynamics. Int Geol Rev 32:486–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Perchuk LL, Podlesskii KK, Aranovich LY (1981) Calculation of thermodynamic properties of end-member minerals from natural parageneses. In: Thermodynamics of minerals and melts. Springer, New York, pp 111–129Google Scholar
  33. Raith M, Raase P, Ackermand D, Lal RK (1983) Regional geothermobarometry in the granulite facies terrane of S India. Tram R Soc Edinb Earth Sci 73:211–244Google Scholar
  34. Rathmell MA, Streepey MM, Essene EJ, van der Pluijm B (1999) Comparison of garnet–biotite, calcite–graphite and calcite - dolomite geothermometry in the Grenville Orogen, Ontario, Canada. Contrib Mineral Petrol 134:217–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sajeev K, Osanai AY, Santosh AM 2004. Ultrahigh-temperature metamorphism followed by two-stage decompression of garnet–orthopyroxene–sillimanite granulites from Ganguvarpatti, Madurai block, southern India. Contrib Mineral Petrol 148:29–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sen SK, Bhattacharya A (1984) An orthopyroxene-garnet thermometer and its application to the Madras charnockites. Contrib Mineral Petrol 88:64–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Smithies RH, Bagas L (1997) High pressure amphibolite-granulite facies metamorphism in the Paleoproterozoic Rudall Complex, central Western Australia. Precambrian Res 83(4):243–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Thomas H (2003) Garnet - orthopyroxene - plagioclase - quartz equilibria: a comparative study. Gond Geol Magz, advances in Precambrian of Central India, special volume no.7, pp 327–337Google Scholar
  39. Thomas H, Paudel LP (2016) Geothermobarometer based on coexisting garnet – orthopyroxene –plagioclase - quartz equilibria. J Nepal Geol Soc 51:1–10Google Scholar
  40. Wu C-M, Cheng B-H (2006) Valid garnet - biotite (GB) geothermometry and garnet-aluminum silicate-plagioclase-quartz (GASP) geobarometry in metapelitic rocks. Lithos 89:1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied GeologyDr. Harisingh Gour VishwavidyalayaSagarIndia

Personalised recommendations