Cation Exchange Capacity of Layer Silicates and Palagonitized Glass in Mafic Volcanic Rocks: A Comparative Study of Bulk Extraction and In Situ Techniques
The cation exchange capacities (CEC) and extractable cations in smectite, corrensite and palagonitized glass from hydrothermally-altered pillow lavas and hyaloclastite breccias were measured by both bulk wet chemical and in situ microanalytical techniques. Smectite has CEC’s between 60 and 120 meq/100 g, palagonitized glass between 30 and 60 meq/100 g, and corrensite approximately 35 meq/100 g as determined by the in situ CsCl-exchange method. These experiments generally verify that Cs exchanges for those cations that are presumed (from the stoichiometry implied by microprobe analyses) to occupy interlayer sites in sheet silicates. Results of conventional CEC determinations are consistent with those determined by the in situ experiments: the individual microanalytical values for smectite and palagonitized glass bracket the bulk CEC values. The in situ experiments imply that Mg is the major extractable cation in smectite, Ca in corrensite, and both Mg and Ca in the palagonitized glass. We speculate that discrepancies between the equivalents of extractable cations predicted from elemental analysis and the equivalents of Cs sorbed may be due to the presence of charge-balancing protons that are not detected by the microprobe analyses. The sum of equivalents of cations extracted by NH4-acetate is about the same as the CEC determined by both the in situ and the bulk methods. Cation proportions indicated by NH4-acetate extractions from bulk samples are also generally consistent with the in situ results for all elements except Mg, which is a minor leachate of the NH4-acetate extractions in all the samples. To explain this discrepancy, we propose that 1) Mg may occupy structural sites within palagonitized glass, which inhibit its extraction by NH4 or Cs, and/or 2) there is a significant quantity of smectite, unsampled by the electron microprobe analyses, which contains insignificant interlayer Mg.
Key WordsCation Exchange Capacity Corrensite Electron microprobe analysis Extractable cations Palagonite Smectite
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Bailey SW. 1982. Nomenclature for regular interstratifications. Am Mineral 67:394–398.Google Scholar
- Bilgrami SA, Howie RA. 1960. The mineralogy and petrology of a rodingite dyke, Hindubaugh, Pakistan. Am Mineral 45:791–801.Google Scholar
- Jackson ML. 1979. Soil chemical analysis-Advanced course, 2nd. ed. Madison, WI: M.L. Jackson. 895 p.Google Scholar
- Soil Survey Staff. 1992. Soil Survey Laboratory Methods Manual: Soil Survey Investigations Report 42, V. 2.0. USDA-Soil Conservation Service, Lincoln, NE. 400 p.Google Scholar
- Southard RJ. 1995. Department of Land, Air and Water Resources, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA 95616.Google Scholar
- Staudigel H. 1981. Der basale Komplex von La Palma. Submarine vulkanische prozesse, Petrologie, Geochemie und sekundare prozesse im herausgehobenen, submarinen Teil einer ozeanischen Insel [Ph.D. thesis]. Bochum, Germany: Ruhr University. 357 p.Google Scholar
- Whittig LD, Allardice WR. 1986. X-ray diffraction techniques. Methods of soil analysis, Part 1: Physical and mineralogic methods, Agronomy Monograph no. 9. American Society of Agronomy—Soil Science of America, p 331–362.Google Scholar
- Zhou Z, Fyfe WS. 1989. Palagonitization of basaltic glass from DSDP Site 335, Leg 37: Textures, chemical composition, and mechanism of formation. Am Mineral 74:1045–1053.Google Scholar
- Zhou Z, Fyfe WS, Tazaki K, van der Gaast SI. 1992. The structural characteristics of palagonite from DSDP Site 335. Can Mineral 30:75–81.Google Scholar