Reviews

A review on the application of lithium isotopes in continental weathering research and progress

  • ZHU Lidong , 1, 2 ,
  • WANG Ji 1, 2 ,
  • YU Ruifei 1, 2 ,
  • LI Fengquan 1, 2 ,
  • YOU Yijing 1, 2 ,
  • LU Haixin 1, 2
Expand
  • 1. College of Geography and Environmental Sciences, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321004, Zhejiang, China
  • 2. Jinhua Key Laboratory of Watershed Earth Surface Processes and Ecological Security, Jinhua 321004, Zhejiang, China

Received date: 2024-05-20

  Revised date: 2024-10-22

  Online published: 2025-02-21

Supported by

Open Fund Key Project of Jinhua Key Laboratory of Watershed Earth Surface Processes and Ecological Security(KF-2022-04)

National Natural Science Foundation of China(41572345)

Abstract

Continental chemical weathering is one of the key processes shaping the Earth's surface morphology, influencing the global material cycle and regulating the global climate. Effectively tracing surface weathering processes has consistently been a focal point within geosciences. Lithium and its isotopes, distinguished by their unique chemical properties, exhibit great potential in tracing continental silicate weathering. This article systematically reviewed the literature and analyzed the fractionation behavior and patterns of lithium isotopes during chemical weathering processes in experimental simulations, weathering profiles, and at the watershed scales. Based on this analysis, the following insights are obtained: 1) The continental weathering process in surface environments is complex, exhibiting a nonlinear relationship between chemical weathering intensity and the δ7Li value. 2) Integrative studies of published data indicate that the relationship between the δ7Li values of weathered materials and lithium content in highly weathered regions exhibits two patterns (The variation in Li content is limited, yet the δ7Li values exhibit significant differentiation; conversely, there is a certain degree of variation in Li content when the differentiation of δ7Li values is limited), with the underlying causes requiring further investigation. 3) The red earth region in southern China is an ideal area for weathering research, showing potential in exploring the mechanisms and patterns of lithium isotope fractionation. This article argues that there are still issues in using lithium isotopes as a tracer for chemical weathering, such as insufficient quantitative studies of complex processes, limited multi-scale integrated research, unclear mechanisms of lithium isotopes in highly weathered products, and the lack of a global weathering estimation model. Future efforts should focus on enhancing laboratory simulations, empirical studies, and multi-scale integrated research to further explore the potential of lithium isotope mechanisms in underexplored areas and validate the effectiveness of lithium isotope tracing in chemical weathering through the combined use of multi-isotope systems.

Cite this article

ZHU Lidong , WANG Ji , YU Ruifei , LI Fengquan , YOU Yijing , LU Haixin . A review on the application of lithium isotopes in continental weathering research and progress[J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2025 , 44(2) : 211 -225 . DOI: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2025.02.001

大陆风化是改变表生环境、影响全球气候变化和物质循环的重要地质过程之一[1-2],其对平衡全球碳循环并维持地球的宜居状态有至关重要的作用。大陆风化的主要形式有碳酸盐岩风化和硅酸盐岩风化。其中陆地碳酸盐岩风化因溶解碳酸盐而释放相对等分子的CO2,基本不影响全球大气CO2浓度;但陆地硅酸盐类岩石的化学风化则可以从大气中吸收CO2,将其封存于风化产物中,从而实现大气CO2净移除,与此同时,大量盐基离子和碱性物质最终被输送至大洋,推动海洋碳酸盐沉积和有机碳的埋藏,不断促使大气CO2转变为海洋碳酸盐岩。在地质时间尺度上,硅酸盐风化过程一直被认为对地球气候起着调控作用[3]
在全球气候变化和地球科学领域中,硅酸盐风化是一个重要的研究课题,目前硅酸盐风化研究多围绕硅酸盐风化速率[4-6]、控制因素[7-10]、风化机制[1,3,11-12]、古气候历史重建[13-14]等方面展开。气候、植被、构造和岩性被认为是影响硅酸盐化学风化速率的主要控制因素。水热条件直接影响风化速率或通过影响径流特征而影响风化速率,特别是在大陆尺度上,硅酸盐矿物的风化强度主要受控于地表温度[7]。White等[9]基于全球花岗岩地区60个小流域的研究证实,温度对化学风化速率起主控作用;Eiriksdottir等[10]基于冰岛北部7个流域的数据,揭示了径流对化学风化速率的显著控制作用。植被则通过植物根系分泌有机酸来加速硅酸盐化学风化,有学者指出,维管植物的扩张会导致硅酸盐化学风化速率增加[15-16]。造山运动会剥蚀出大量新鲜岩石,从而加快风化物质的供给,导致硅酸盐风化速率的增加。例如,在地质时间尺度上,全球硅酸盐风化和CO2吸收率的估算显示,构造活跃地区的贡献占全球硅酸盐岩化学风化所消耗CO2总量的50%[17]。新西兰南阿尔卑斯山的研究也表明,构造抬升更快的西侧山体平均风化速率较东侧高出5倍[18]。在岩性方面,孙明照[19]的研究表明,云南腾冲市北海乡安山岩流域的风化速率是花岗岩流域风化速率的2.5倍。还有一些学者基于硅酸盐风化,开展构造及古气候历史重建研究,如Clift[20]通过中国南海和孟加拉湾的深海沉积记录重建了喜马拉雅山脉的风化剥蚀历史,发现其很好地响应了中中新世气候适宜期(middle mioceneclimatic optimum,MMCO)及随后的全球降温。黄土沉积记录表明,风化反馈机制能较好地响应形成时期的气候变化[21-22],中国南方网纹红土的风化成壤特征揭示出东亚夏季风异常强盛信号[23],典型红土剖面的化学风化记录较好响应了中更新世气候转型事件[24]
新生代气候变冷机制的讨论中,涌现出诸如BLAG、隆升—风化、构造隆升—碳埋藏、岛弧隆升—风化、火山铁肥、海道开合等一系列假说,这些假说都一致强调全球大气CO2浓度变化在构造尺度上对气候变化的驱动作用,并且硅酸盐风化仍然被上述一些假说认为是调节大气CO2浓度变化的关键过程[25]。然而,有关硅酸盐风化机制的探讨尚有争议,如BLAG假说[2,3,25]认为地球的排气作用是控制大气CO2浓度乃至全球气候变化的根本原因,风化速率作为负反馈随着全球气候变化而变化[3,25]。隆升—风化假说[11-12]则认为构造控制的化学风化驱动着气候变化,最新研究还表明风化强度对气候变化的影响比风化通量更显著[26]。可见,大陆风化示踪研究已经取得显著进展,但岩石化学风化速率是受“构造控制”还是受“气候控制”尚无定论,特别是表生环境下其他地理因素对风化过程的影响和复杂性,会使区域尺度上硅酸盐风化状况存在显著的差异。就大陆风化示踪方法看,早期风化研究多强调元素地球化学行为以及矿物转化过程,很难做到量化研究。随着技术手段和分析方法的进步,研究者们发现非传统同位素指标为化学风化的量化评估提供了新的视角。在化学风化的示踪研究中,前人多采用Sr、Mg、Ca、Si、Os、Fe、Li等同位素体系进行风化的量化研究[27-33]。然而,随着研究的深入,有学者发现在风化研究中部分同位素体系受到碳酸盐风化(如Sr)[29-30]、生物过程(如Mg、Ca、Si)[31-32]和氧化还原过程的干扰(如Os)[33],无法准确地提取沉积物中的风化信息。相比之下,Li同位素化学性质独特[34-36],不受上述过程的影响,因此成为目前最具潜力的硅酸盐风化代用指标。本文将基于Li元素及其同位素基本性质,系统梳理Li同位素在实验室模拟和地球表生环境中的地球化学行为,归纳Li同位素在流域尺度地理过程及大陆剖面风化过程中的分馏特征和可能存在的问题,为进一步全面理解大陆硅酸盐化学风化Li同位素分馏机理及其环境示踪意义奠定基础。

1 锂元素及其同位素基本性质

锂位于元素周期表第二周期第Ⅰ主族,原子序数为3,离子半径为0.076 nm,常见化合价为+1,是质量最轻的金属元素、碱金属元素。单从地球化学性质来看:① Li具有中等不相容元素的性质,Li+与Mg2+(0.066 nm)、Al3+(0.051 nm)、Fe2+(0.074 nm)的离子半径比较接近,可以在铁镁质岩石和铝质硅酸盐矿物中发生类质同象替代[37]。② Li具有单一化合价(+1),地表过程中Li同位素分馏几乎不受氧化还原条件的影响[38]。③ Li在海洋中的留存时间(1.5 Ma)远大于海水混合时间(1 ka),故海洋中Li同位素组成相对均一[13]。④ Li作为非营养元素,生物过程中不会造成Li同位素分馏[39]
锂在自然界分布广泛,主要存在两种稳定同位素6Li和7Li,丰度分别为7.52%和92.48%。因Li具有极强的流体活动性,以及6Li和7Li间巨大的质量差,其同位素分馏高达60‰[40],能有效记录宏观构造过程和微观矿物转换等过程[41]。Li在很多地质过程中都会发生分馏,致使不同地质储库中的Li同位素组成差异显著(图1)[42]。Li同位素组成(δ7Li)的表达式为:
δ7Li =[(7Li /6Li)样品/(7Li /6Li)标样-1]×1000‰
其中,国际上广泛采用的标样是美国国家标准与技术研究所(National Institute of Standards and Technology,NIST)合成的L-SVEC碳酸锂(Li2CO3),其7Li/6Li=12.02±0.03[43]
图1 不同地质储库的Li同位素组成

注:数据引自文献[14,34,37,40-41,44,48,51-56]。

Fig.1 Lithium isotopic compositions of various geological reservoirs

不同地质储库中6Li、7Li的分馏状况,即δ7Li值,取决于特定的地质环境。在自然界中已观察到Li同位素超过110‰的分馏,约90‰的分馏发生在地表/近地表环境中,高温过程引起的Li同位素分馏较小[44-46]。如图1所示,上地壳δ7Li平均值为0±2‰,而地幔和大洋玄武岩的δ7Li值均为+4‰,可见Li同位素在地球的高温体系中分馏较弱。有研究表明,温度超过350 ℃时Li同位素分馏较弱[36],温度超过900 ℃的岩浆作用过程中Li同位素几乎不发生分馏[47]。相反,低温地球系统如蚀变洋壳、脱水地幔岩以及榴辉岩质的俯冲板片中,Li的中等不相容元素性质导致其同位素的分馏非常大[48-50]。不难推知,这也是表生环境中Li同位素分馏十分显著的主要原因。
鉴于表生环境的复杂性,各地质储库中δ7Li值的变幅很大,介于-40‰~+50‰之间(图1)。Li作为微量元素,主要赋存于硅酸盐岩矿物中,碳酸盐矿物几乎不含Li,即使在碳酸盐主导的汇流区也是如此[57-58]。但不同硅酸盐类型间δ7Li值的差异较大,如花岗岩、玄武岩、辉长岩、橄榄岩、页岩的δ7Li值依次为-10‰~+18‰、-6.6‰~+4.5‰、+4.3‰、+4‰、-3.38‰~+3.92‰[14,40,53,59]。然而,因Li具有一定的水溶性,表生环境化学风化过程,如溶解、淋滤、迁移、次生矿物形成和吸附等过程不断导致6Li、7Li间的分馏,通常6Li易于被吸附而优先进入固相,7Li则倾向于进入流体相[27,46,57,60]。相比之下,各类主要水体的δ7Li值均偏正,如河水为+0.8‰~+45.1‰[44,57],湖泊水为+15‰~+37‰,盐湖卤水为+7.4‰~+34.4‰[50,61],地下水为+0.5‰~+46‰,海水约为+31‰[50]。而固相风化产物的土壤,其δ7Li值可偏正,也可偏负,变化范围介于-20‰~+30‰之间[51]。其他地质储库的δ7Li值也有一些报道[34,37,39,40,44,48,51-56]。可见,Li同位素独特的地球化学性质以及各地质储库Li同位素的分馏研究,充分展现出Li同位素对化学风化强度变化有较为敏锐的响应能力,具备大陆硅酸盐风化示踪的潜力。

2 锂同位素示踪大陆风化的研究现状

表生环境下大陆硅酸盐化学风化过程中Li同位素行为的应用研究主要聚焦于三大领域:实验室模拟、大陆风化剖面、流域研究。

2.1 锂同位素实验室模拟研究

Li同位素行为的室内模拟研究是进一步开展地表过程Li元素迁移规律和Li同位素分馏行为研究的基础。实验模拟主要涉及原生矿物溶解、次生矿物形成、离子交换吸附/解吸等方面。原生矿物的溶解实验多针对玄武岩和花岗岩,酸溶实验表明,玄武岩的部分溶解不会导致明显的Li同位素分馏,而花岗岩Li同位素分馏则较为显著[27,49,62]。次生矿物吸附与粘土合成的深度实验发现,蛭石、高岭石、蒙脱石、水铝矿、氢氧化铁胶体等不同类型矿物Li吸附实验中Li同位素分馏结果存在明显差异,如蒙脱石几乎不发生Li同位素分馏,水铝矿Li同位素分馏却非常显著[63]。实验还发现,Li在次生矿物中的化学结构特性(键强和配位数)对Li同位素分馏起决定性作用[64]。通常,键能越高、配位数越低。重同位素7Li更倾向富集于低配位成键环境[65]。因此,次生矿物形成过程中,锂先进入矿物晶格并占据八面体的中心位置,形成6配位数结构,而在液相水体中,锂则以4配位数的形式存在[66],这种分异进而导致7Li更容易优先进入水体,6Li则更倾向于进入次生粘土矿物。Wimpenny等[63]的模拟实验还强调,粘土矿物中存在两个吸收Li的位点:一是矿物内部的层间位点(结构结合型Li),二是矿物表面的可交换位点(吸附型Li)。其中,结构结合型Li偏向吸附轻的6Li,且该位点Li同位素的分馏较明显,δ7Li值+14‰~+24‰,而可交换的Li几乎不发生同位素分馏[36]。总之,目前实验室模拟研究的基本共识是:次生矿物的形成过程是Li同位素分馏的主要原因,具体表现为次生矿物形成过程中7Li的优先释放和粘土矿物对6Li的优先吸收。
然而,表生环境条件较实验条件复杂得多,这就使得由实验室衍生的分馏因素在地质环境中示踪大陆化学风化时变得更加复杂[67-68]。如天然样品的结构型Li与吸附型Li的平衡分馏与实验模拟的结果并不一致。粘土矿物类型会影响Li同位素分馏结果,如伊利石、蒙脱石很少引起Li同位素分馏,三水铝石和高岭石等会引起较大的Li同位素分馏[49,69],但实验还无法准确揭示不同矿物之间的分馏因子和分馏系数[70],这成为风化示踪研究的关键障碍。

2.2 风化剖面锂同位素实证研究

剖面尺度上Li同位素实证研究,多聚焦于风化壳剖面。风化壳剖面由表及里的风化连续性和风化强度变化,使其成为研究Li同位素组成与风化强度变化之间关系的理想对象[71]。由于玄武岩有相对均一的Li同位素组成(+4‰),并且和原始地幔Li同位素组成基本一致,早期研究多关注玄武岩风化壳的Li同位素组成[27,35,49,62,72]。随着研究的深入,越来越多的学者意识到,仅就玄武岩风化壳剖面Li行为的研究远远不足以理解硅酸盐风化过程中Li同位素行为。花岗岩作为大陆上地壳的重要物质组成,其风化过程对全球碳循环具有不可忽视的重要贡献。有学者认为,花岗岩风化速率缓慢的特性有助于更细致地剖析硅酸盐风化过程中Li的迁移规律及其同位素分馏机理,研究焦点逐渐转向花岗岩风化壳剖面[71,73-78]。此外,辉绿岩[45,79]、石灰岩[28,80]、页岩[81]、安山岩[82-83]构成的风化壳剖面也得到了关注,这些研究不仅拓宽了剖面尺度上Li同位素研究的广度,也丰富了不同岩性风化壳剖面中Li同位素分布特征的认识,一定程度上验证了Li同位素实验模拟研究的结果。
由于风化壳形成于一个开放体系,其Li同位素组成受到源岩、气候、水文、生物、风化时间、外源输入等因素的共同制约[44,51,84-88]。考虑到不同区域的环境背景以及影响风化剖面地球化学组成的主导因素存在差异,不同风化壳剖面间Li及其同位素组成也呈现出复杂性[49,85]。尽管如此,大陆风化剖面中Li同位素行为研究仍取得以下共识:① 基岩和基岩风化物的Li同位素组成存在明显差异,多数剖面新鲜基岩的δ7Li值高于风化产物,但风化程度与δ7Li值的相关关系存在不确定性[45,49,89];② 风化壳发育过程中,伴有海相气溶胶、大气降尘、雨水等外源物质的输入,这对剖面Li含量有重要贡献[35,51,59,71,89-90];③ 地下水古水面可能导致土壤包水带Li发生动力学扩散分馏[45,89];④ 风化壳中δ7Li值的变化会受到次生矿物形成和溶解的影响[39,71,83,86];⑤ Li同位素分馏还可能受pH值[73]、Fe-Mn氧化物溶解/再沉淀[91]、黑云母溶解[76]、石英富集[75]等多种因素的影响,因而表生风化过程中Li同位素分馏行为具有复杂性。
然而,剖面尺度的集成研究尚有不足,很难从全球视角认识大陆硅酸盐风化的Li同位素示踪结果。仅有的集成研究是仝凤台[77]对不同气候带基性岩风化壳剖面Li同位素分馏行为的探究,其初步揭示了降水、温度对硅酸盐风化过程中Li同位素分馏行为的影响。具体而言,年降水量<1500 mm、年均温<15 ℃时,Li同位素分馏程度随降水增加而增加、随温度升高而增大;当年降水量>1500 mm、年均温>15 ℃时,Li同位素分馏值则随降水增加而减小、随温度升高而减小。这一规律是否符合中酸性岩(如花岗岩、安山岩)风化壳剖面则需进一步验证。

2.3 流域尺度锂同位素实证研究

流域是由分水线包围而成的集水区,与风化剖面(风化物就地残留)相比,流域内河流作用导致物质输移过程十分活跃。分水线附近的山地是流域内物质供给的源头,而流域河流系统是连接造山带与海洋物质交换的重要通道,陆源侵蚀物会以溶解态和悬浮态的形式进入水系,最终输向海洋。基于新生代以来海水δ7Li值不断增高的事实,有学者推测这可能与流域贡献密切相关[13]。Dellinger等[92]对全球范围内大型河流的集成研究发现,流域风化强度与河水δ7Li值之间存在独特的倒U型“回旋镖”式关系,当新鲜基岩(弱化学风化)或次生粘土溶解(强化学风化)占主导地位时,河水中就会观察到类似基岩的δ7Li值,当次生矿物形成占主导地位时,河水中的δ7Li值达到峰值[93]。该观点得到了马更些河[94]、长江[60,62]、黄河[95]、亚马逊河[92]、喜马拉雅地区河流[58]、新西兰南岛地区河流[96]等流域Li同位素研究结果的支持。
然而,大量流域尺度Li同位素地球化学行为的深入研究发现,河流系统特别是大型河流系统中Li含量及其同位素组成具有复杂性和多解性。流域硅酸盐岩风化[94,97]、大气降水[82,98]、蒸发岩的溶解[60,95,99]和火山热液活动[38,61,100]等因素都有可能成为河流Li的潜在来源。所以河流中δ7Li值也并不只是反映流域硅酸盐风化信号。近年来,小流域研究逐渐成为热点并取得了一些进展。首先是不同岩性集水区河水的δ7Li值存在较大差异。如,法属西印度群岛瓜德罗普岛安山岩集水区(+8.2‰~+9.3‰)[82]、孚日山脉花岗岩集水区(+5.3‰~+19.6‰)[39]、阿巴拉契亚山地页岩集水区(+14.5‰~+40.0‰)[81]、冰岛西南部玄武岩集水区(+10.9‰~+43.7‰)[101]。其次,同为安山岩的波多黎各东北部集水区的河水δ7Li值(+31.9‰~+36.6‰)被认为是受到了降雨和大气尘降的显著影响[83]。流域水体Li同位素组成还可受到高岭石形成、铁氧化物吸附作用的控制[81]以及热泉汇入的影响[102]。此外,河水δ7Li值的季节变化受温度和季风降雨控制[98];不同地区水体的流动性也会导致Li的差异脱出[41];悬浮物中不同粘土矿物和流体之间不同的分馏系数对流域河水δ7Li值变化也有影响[60,96]。上述研究足以表明河水Li源及δ7Li值变化具有复杂性。一些学者将这种复杂性归纳为“过程控制”和“源控制”[95,103]。过程控制强调原生矿物的溶解、次生矿物形成的比例、水岩作用时间、悬浮物再分配、环境pH值和温度因素的改变[95,97,104]。源控制主要强调富Li物质的影响,如蒸发岩或地热水等[95,99-100,102]。但共识是,溶解态Li同位素组成主要受原生矿物溶解速率和次生矿物形成的影响[4,58,98]

3 大陆化学风化锂同位素分馏的机理认知及模式

3.1 流域锂同位素分馏机理与模式

根据经典地貌学模型,流域内通常存在两种风化机制:动力限制型和供应限制型[105],它们受区域构造和气候的联合控制,从上游至下游逐渐由动力限制型向供应限制型转换。如图2a所示,流域高地势处河流的上游区,水流速度快、侵蚀率高、水岩作用时间短、水热条件差、化学风化弱,物理剥蚀大于化学风化,表现为动力限制型风化。源区物质逐渐被搬运至沉积区的过程中,河流通过搬运能力的变化不断地调整其物质载荷能力及水岩作用过程,随着地势渐趋平缓、水流速度减慢、悬浮物大量沉积、水岩作用时间增长、化学风化大于物理剥蚀,形成供应限制型风化。而流域Li同位素分馏机理的研究也多围绕流域地理过程展开,以Dellinger等[92]、Bouchez等[93]和Pogge von Strandmann等[106]的研究为代表,其主要结论及观点是:控制河流溶解态锂同位素组成的主要因素是风化机制,而非岩性或气候,河流溶解态δ7Li能反映流域风化强度。在此基础上,通过集成研究[92]进一步得到化学风化强度与流域Li同位素分馏之间的倒U型“回旋镖”模式(图2b),这种关系归因于流域风化机制的变化。风化机制可以通过控制原生矿物溶解相较于次级矿物形成的比例来影响河流锂同位素特征[93],这一比例被描述为风化一致性或强度[96]。可溶性矿物的完全溶解可视为一致风化,硅酸盐矿物的不完全溶解被视为不一致风化。将一致风化和不一致风化放入流域系统中考虑,我们会发现流域系统河流上源区(图2b中A点位)以侵蚀为主,新鲜碎屑物充足,但受地形、水流速度影响,碎屑物不易堆积,水岩作用时间短,次生矿物难以形成,呈现一致风化,河水δ7Li值低(接近新鲜基岩值)。在流域河流系统的搬运区(图2b中B点位),新鲜碎屑物质供应充足,加之地形变缓、水量增加、流速减慢等因素有利于水岩作用时间增长和次生矿物形成,呈现出不一致风化,河水δ7Li值升高并达到峰值。位于流域系统河流下游的沉积区(图2b中C点位),地势极为平缓,水流速度缓慢,但新鲜碎屑物供应受到限制,进而抑制次生矿物形成,甚至部分粘土矿物发生溶解,再次呈现一致风化,河水δ7Li值也再次呈现低值(接近新鲜基岩值)。最终,流域系统溶解态Li同位素分馏构成了倒U型“回旋镖”模式。
图2 水岩作用时间与溶解态δ7Li之间联系的概念图

注:据文献[93,107-108]改绘。

Fig.2 A conceptual diagram linking regolith residence time to dissolved δ7Li signatures

将风化机制与流域溶解态Li同位素组成相结合,硅酸盐风化程度与河水Li同位素变化的因素也呈现出三个类型。低风化程度下,原生矿物溶解对河水δ7Li值影响最显著(图2中A点位);中等风化程度下,大量粘土矿物形成对河水δ7Li值影响最显著(图2中B点位);强风化程度下,粘土矿物溶解释放的6Li对河水δ7Li值影响显著(图2中C点位)。

3.2 风化壳剖面锂同位素分馏机理及模式

风化产物锂同位素分馏行为的早期研究指出,风化物δ7Li值随风化程度增强而降低,即δ7Li与化学蚀变指数(chemical index of alteration,CIA)之间存在负相关关系[34,45,89]。但随着研究剖面的增多,学者们发现风化物δ7Li值还受到化学风化强度以外其他因素的影响[35,51,72-73,78,85-86],故而与风化程度呈非线性关系。风化壳形成于开放体系,化学组成受岩性、气候、水岩过程、生物作用、地形、形成时间和外源物质输入等因素的共同影响,并且这些因素会导致其化学风化的地域差异[8,109]。当风化壳剖面形成的主控因素有异时,其化学组成及化学风化特征也必然有别。基于这一认知,不同风化剖面Li同位素特征及其分馏行为一定也是多解的。总体来看,各地玄武岩剖面的Li同位素分馏行为较为复杂。如,夏威夷玄武岩风化产物的δ7Li值高于未风化基岩[51,90];广东湛江[59]、海南文昌[91]、印度德干高原[89]等地玄武岩风化产物的δ7Li值均低于未风化基岩,冰岛玄武岩风化产物δ7Li值则是一部分高于未风化基岩,一部分低于未风化基岩,研究剖面上δ7Li值垂向变化的特征或趋势也有较大差异[110]。有研究认为海岛区与大陆区玄武岩风化物的Li同位素分馏机理就存在明显的分异,海相气溶胶输入和大气干湿沉降可能是导致这种差异的主要原因[77]。目前,在玄武岩风化剖面Li同位素分馏机理方面确有复杂性,尚未形成化学风化与Li同位素分馏机理间的有效模式。
相比之下,花岗岩风化壳剖面Li同位素组成及其分馏行为也受复杂因素的影响,如风尘输入、风化程度、原生矿物差异性风化、次生矿物形成乃至氧化还原环境等[71,73-78]。但就现有结果来看,花岗岩风化剖面风化产物的δ7Li值与风化强度之间存在较好的耦合关系[71,75]。只要花岗岩风化剖面发育是比较完整的,这种关系即便是在不同气候环境下,风化产物δ7Li值与风化强度间具相似的相关关系[71]。例如,大兴安岭地区[71]与广东地区[75]花岗岩风化产物的δ7Li值均随风化强度的增加,呈现先降低再升高的趋势。但在一些花岗岩风化较弱地区(如青藏高原东缘)的风化壳剖面上,未观察到剖面上部风化产物δ7Li值升高的现象[76]。有学者对花岗岩风化剖面上化学风化与Li同位分馏机理间的关系进行了总结,以张俊文等学者的研究为代表[71,74],初步构建出花岗岩风化Li同位素地球化学行为概念模型(图3)。该模型包括两种情况:不考虑外源输入的影响(图3a)和考虑外源输入的影响(图3b)。根据风化壳剖面由表及里化学风化程度由强渐弱的规律,花岗岩风化剖面下部以岩体的破解和弱化学风化为主,该阶段(图3a剖面下段)Li同位素没有明显的分馏现象,δ7Li值与基岩接近。沿剖面向上,化学风化逐渐增加(图3a剖面中段),部分原生矿物转化为次生矿物,风化物中6Li含量增加,δ7Li值较基岩显著偏轻[45]。从风化剖面中部至顶部,化学风化继续增强,强风化条件下部分次生矿物发生溶解,6Li被释放并沿剖面向下迁移,从而导致风化产物中δ7Li值又开始偏重,向地表方向呈升高趋势(图3a剖面上段)[51,59,71,91]。可见,无外源物质输入的情况下,花岗岩风化剖面δ7Li值与CIA之间关系的变化主要受控于原生矿物风化和次生矿物形成。考虑到花岗岩风化剖面顶部有大气沉降等外源Li输入[69,71,90],与图3a模式相比,图3b模式只是在风化物顶部表现出δ7Li值偏轻的现象,且与基岩δ7Li值呈接近趋势[39,51,69,75,89-90]。该模型Li同位素分馏机理较好地反映了花岗岩Li同位素行为与粘土矿物之间的关系。是否适用于所有花岗岩类风化剖面仍需进行更多验证。
图3 花岗岩剖面Li同位素地球化学行为的概念模型

注:据文献[71,74]改绘。τLi表示Li元素在风化过程中相对于原岩的富集或亏损程度。

Fig.3 Patterns of the lithium isotopic geochemical behavior in the weathering process of granite

4 强风化地区锂同位素分馏行为探索

如前文所述,随着研究剖面的增多,人们发现风化物δ7Li值与化学蚀变指数(CIA)呈非线性关系。本文对已发表的不同岩性的风化壳剖面数据和近年来课题组在中国南方红土区工作中尚未发表的砂岩风化壳数据进行集成,其结果也基本印证了风化物CIA与δ7Li值之间的非线性关系及其影响因素的复杂性(图4)。
图4 不同岩性风化壳剖面CIA与δ7Li值集成模式

注:数据引自文献[34,39,45,49,51,69,71,73,74,77-79,82,83,89-91,110-114];部分数据为课题组未发表数据。

Fig.4 Integration model of CIA and δ7Li values in weathering crust profiles of different lithologies

表生环境条件下,CIA<65被视为初等化学风化程度,反映偏干冷的气候条件;CIA值介于65~85之间为中等化学风化程度,指示温暖湿润气候条件;CIA>85则指示高等化学风化程度,反映炎热、潮湿气候条件[115]。据此进一步分析图4,初等化学风化程度下,δ7Li值随着CIA值的增高而逐渐偏轻,两者大致呈反相关关系;中等化学风化程度下,δ7Li值却随着CIA值增高而逐渐偏重,两者大致表现为正相关关系;CIA>85,尤其是CIA>90时,高强化学风化程度下,风化物δ7Li值不再随着CIA值的增高而发生变化,两者间几乎没有相关性。图4所示的集成模式的结果,支持Li同位素分馏行为可能还受诸如石英富集、地下水作用、次生矿物溶解与再沉淀等其他因素影响的观点。可见,目前Li同位素作为当前和过去风化过程的示踪剂已得到广泛认可,但大陆风化剖面的Li同位素组成能否准确响应风化过程的变化仍存在复杂性。硅酸盐风化过程中的Li同位素行为不能仅用粘土矿物的类型和数量来解释。强风化地区强化学风化产物Li同位素的分馏机理的研究尚属空白,需要给予关注并进一步加强探索。
大陆风化研究领域,风化与地质时期地球气候演化关系的研究一直是学界热议的焦点[116-117]。高原隆升—风化假说[1,11-12]从地质碳循环角度建立了构造—风化—气候之间的联系,强调构造控制的化学风化是气候变化的驱动因子。如青藏高原快速隆升导致物理剥蚀加剧、季风降水增加、硅酸盐化学风化增强、新生代气候变冷[1,11-12,25]。最新研究还揭示,新近纪以来的全球变冷过程,风化强度的影响比风化通量更为显著[26]。因此,风化强度与锂同位素分馏机制的研究也有待深入。本文强调的高风化区主要指符合高温高湿条件的亚热带季风区和热带高温多雨区。红粘土、网纹红土、砖红壤和砖红壤性红壤、各种岩性上发育的红色风化壳等是强风化地区的代表性风化产物,CIA>85,甚至>90[118-119]。这些高强度化学风化产物的物质分馏机理及其影响因素的研究,对全面理解地表风化过程及其与地球系统演化十分重要,但探索却十分有限。如锂同位素行为的实验室模拟研究,尚未涉及对风化高级阶段锰、铁、铝氧化物和氢氧化物形成、解吸、溶解等复杂过程的研究[71,83]。流域尺度和风化剖面Li同位素行为的实证研究均未达成一致[44,84],特别是一些Li同位素异常现象[35,83,91]的机理认知尚有争议等。
本文将已报道的高风化地区各类风化物样品的δ7Li值及Li含量数据与地幔、上地壳(UCC)、海相气溶胶(接近海水)、雨水、亚洲沙尘、大气降尘等样品进行集成,得到图5。首先,相对于地幔Li同位素组成(图5中灰色阴影区),强风化样品δ7Li值变幅较大(-14.3‰~+21.9‰),仍然符合表生环境下Li同位素分馏显著的规律。其次,高风化样品δ7Li值与Li含量之间的关系表现为两种模式:一是Li<30 μg·g-1区间,样品Li含量变化有限,但δ7Li值分异却十分显著(图5中蓝色阴影区)。这一模式的样品主要来自菲律宾(Phili1),巴拿马(FH),中国广东(HZ、TT)、广西(YS)和海南(WC)等地的基岩风化壳;二是Li>30 μg·g-1区间,样品δ7Li值分异有限,Li含量却存在一定程度的分异。该模式的样品则是来自中国亚热带季风区一些红层盆地内的高风化红土样品(TX、QJ、PJLK、JL、SL)。两种模式的化学风化机制和Li同位素分馏机理值得进一步探讨。
图5 高风化地区基岩风化壳、红土、黄土等地质储库的δ7Li值与Li含量图

注:数据引自文献[28,34-35,46,49,59,73,75,77,82,91,114];QJ、PJLK、TX、JL为课题组未发表数据;HG为广东雷琼玄武岩风化壳样品,由于其δ7Li值与Li含量之间的关系与文中所述的分布模式不符,因此未在文中列出。

Fig.5 δ7Li value versus lithium content of geological reservoirs such as weathered crust of basic rock and red earth and loess in high weathering area

值得注意的是,中国南方地区红土分布十分广泛,面积达220万km2,各类风化剖面中蕴藏有丰富的地球化学信息和环境演化信息[24,118,120],是开展大陆风化研究的理想区域。加之多剖面间红土δ7Li值的变化相对稳定(图5),且与上陆壳δ7Li值接近,适合开展机理与模式探索。目前仅有的为数不多的报道来自云南石林红土区[28,80,111],涉及分馏机理的探索几乎为空白。

5 结论与展望

随着Li同位素分析技术的进步和全球地质储库中Li同位素组成的完善,Li同位素大陆风化示踪研究的意义日渐凸显,应用领域也日趋广泛。本文在研究现状的基础上获得的重要认识有:
(1) 表生环境下影响大陆风化的因素和地理过程十分复杂,致使化学风化强度与δ7Li值之间不是简单的线性关系,而是较为复杂的非线性关系。对各类风化物而言,CIA<65时,δ7Li值随CIA值增高逐渐偏轻,两者大致呈反相关关系;CIA介于65~85时,δ7Li值随CIA值增高而逐渐偏重,两者大致为正相关关系;CIA>85,尤其是CIA>90时,δ7Li值不随CIA值增高而发生变化,两者间几乎没有相关性。
(2) 已发表数据的集成研究表明,强风化地区各类风化物δ7Li值与Li含量之间的关系表现出两种模式。一是Li含量变化有限,但δ7Li值分异却十分显著;二是δ7Li值分异有限,Li含量却存在一定的分异。基于两种模式的Li同位素风化示踪机理的探索尚处空白。
(3) 中国南方红土区是开展大陆风化研究的理想区域。多剖面多类型红土的δ7Li值相对稳定,且与上陆壳δ7Li值接近,具备Li同位素分馏机理与模式探索的潜力。
然而,Li同位素体系示踪大陆风化的研究仍然面对一些挑战,诸如地表复杂过程对Li同位素大陆风化示踪的影响、不同尺度上Li同位素分馏机理及其结果的整合研究、Li同位素分馏中就地风化与外源输入信号的定量解译方法、基于Li同位素体系的全球大陆风化的定量估算模型等。未来值得进一步深入探究的问题有:① 实验室模拟与实证研究相结合,增强对复杂过程的观测、实验模拟和多因素分析,量化并正确评估不同要素、不同过程Li同位素行为导致的化学风化贡献量;② 填补高风化地区Li同位素分馏行为研究的空白,围绕本文发现的强风化产物Li含量与δ7Li关系的两种模式,进一步开展成因探讨;③ 增强多尺度集成研究,深化Li同位素分馏因子以及不同次生矿物Li分馏系数的认识,建立相关理论模型,以提高Li同位素示踪大陆风化研究的可靠性;④ 鉴于表生环境的复杂性,风化研究还需借助Mg、Sr、Ca等其他同位素体系互为补充和印证,以期全面认识化学风化过程及其控制机制。
[1]
Raymo M E, Ruddiman W F. Tectonic forcing of late Cenozoic climate[J]. Nature, 1992, 359: 117-122.

[2]
Walker J C G, Hays P B, Kasting J F. A negative feedback mechanism for the long-term stabilization of Earth's surface temperature[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research, 1981, 86: 9776-9782.

[3]
Berner R A, Lasaga A C, Garrels R M. The carbonate-silicate geochemical cycle and its effect on atmospheric carbon dioxide over the past 100 million years[J]. American Journal of Science, 1983, 283: 641-683.

[4]
Zhang F, Dellinger M, Hilton R G, et al. Hydrological control of river and seawater lithium isotopes[J]. Nature Communications, 2022, 13: 3359. doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-31076-y.

PMID

[5]
Bufe A, Hovius N, Emberson R, et al. Co-variation of silicate, carbonate and sulfide weathering drives CO2 release with erosion[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2021, 14(4): 211-216.

[6]
蒋浩, 徐志方, 赵童, 等. 青藏高原流域岩石风化速率及其控制机制: 以贡嘎山地区典型地质背景小流域研究为例[J]. 第四纪研究, 2018, 38(1): 278-286.

[Jiang Hao, Xu Zhifang, Zhao Tong, et al. The weathering rates and controlling factors of the Tibetan Plateau: A case study of small catchments of typical lithology in Gongga Mountainous area. Quaternary Sciences, 2018, 38(1): 278-286. ]

[7]
Deng K, Yang S Y, Guo Y L. A global temperature control of silicate weathering intensity[J]. Nature Communications, 2022, 13(1): 1781. doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-29415-0.

PMID

[8]
Yang L, Zhang F, Hu Y D, et al. Seasonal variations of chemical weathering and CO2 consumption processes in the headwater (Datong River Basin) of the Yellow River draining the Tibetan Plateau[J]. Frontiers in Earth Science, 2022, 10: 909749. doi: 10.3389/feart.2022.909749.

[9]
White A F, Blum A E. Effects of climate on chemical_weathering in watersheds[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 1995, 59(9): 1729-1747.

[10]
Eiriksdottir E S, Gislason S R, Oelkers E H. Does temperature or runoff control the feedback between chemical denudation and climate? Insights from NE Iceland[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2013, 107: 65-81.

[11]
Chamberlin T C. An attempt to frame a working hypothesis of the cause of glacial periods on an atmospheric basis (continued)[J]. The Journal of Geology, 1899, 7(7): 667-685.

[12]
Raymo M E, Ruddiman W F, Froelich P N. Influence of late Cenozoic mountain building on ocean geochemical cycles[J]. Geology, 1988, 16(7): 649-653.

[13]
Misra S, Froelich P N. Lithium isotope history of Cenozoic seawater: Changes in silicate weathering and reverse weathering[J]. Science, 2012, 335: 818-823.

DOI PMID

[14]
Wei G Y, Zhao M Y, Sperling E A, et al. Lithium isotopic constraints on the evolution of continental clay mineral factory and marine oxygenation in the earliest Paleozoic Era[J]. Science Advances, 2024, 10(13): eadk2152. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adk2152.

[15]
Berner R A. The carbon cycle and carbon dioxide over Phanerozoic time: The role of land plants[J]. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 1998, 353: 75-82.

[16]
Retallack G J. Early forest soils and their role in devonian global change[J]. Science, 1997, 276: 583-585.

PMID

[17]
Hilley G E, Porder S. A framework for predicting global silicate weathering and CO2 drawdown rates over geologic time-scales[J]. PNAS, 2008, 105(44): 16855-16859.

[18]
Jacobson A D, Blum J D, Chamberlain C P, et al. Climatic and tectonic controls on chemical weathering in the New Zealand Southern Alps[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2003, 67(1): 29-46.

[19]
孙明照. 硅酸盐风化速率及其控制因素: 来自不同“小流域系统”的研究[D]. 南京: 南京大学, 2018.

[Sun Mingzhao. Silicate weathering rate and its controlling factors: the study from the different "small watershed systems". Nanjing, China: Nanjing University, 2018. ]

[20]
Clift P D. Enhanced global continental erosion and exhumation driven by Oligo-Miocene climate change[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2010, 37(9): 633-650.

[21]
Xiong S F, Ding Z L, Zhu Y J, et al. A ∼6Ma chemical weathering history, the grain size dependence of chemical weathering intensity, and its implications for provenance change of the Chinese loess-red clay deposit[J]. Quaternary Science Reviews, 2010, 29(15/16): 1911-1922.

[22]
顾兆炎, 丁仲礼, 熊尚发, 等. 灵台红粘土和黄土—古土壤序列的地球化学演化[J]. 第四纪研究, 1999, 19(4): 357-365.

[Gu Zhaoyan, Ding Zhongli, Xiong Shangfa, et al. A seven million geochemical record from Chinese red-clay and loess-paleosol sequence: Weathering and erosion in Northwestern China. Quaternary Sciences, 1999, 19(4): 357-365. ]

[23]
尹秋珍, 郭正堂. 中国南方的网纹红土与东亚季风的异常强盛期[J]. 科学通报, 2006, 51(2): 186-193.

[Yin Qiuzhen, Guo Zhengtang. Mid-pleistocene vermiculated red soils in Southern China as an indication of unusually strengthened East Asian monsoon. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2006, 51(2): 186-193. ]

[24]
熊文婷, 朱丽东, 张晓, 等. 中国南方红土记录的中更新世气候转型及其环境效应[J]. 第四纪研究, 2020, 40(6): 1441-1452.

[Xiong Wenting, Zhu Lidong, Zhang Xiao, et al. Middle Pleistocene transition and its environmental effects revealed by red earth of South China. Quaternary Sciences, 2020, 40(6): 1441-1452. ]

[25]
靳华龙, 万世明. 新生代气候变冷机制研究进展[J]. 海洋地质与第四纪地质, 2019, 39(5): 71-86.

[Jin Hualong, Wan Shiming. The mechanism of Cenozoic cooling: A review of research progress. Marine Geology & Quaternary Geology, 2019, 39(5): 71-86. ]

[26]
Caves Rugenstein J K, Ibarra D E, von Blanckenburg F. Neogene cooling driven by land surface reactivity rather than increased weathering fluxes[J]. Nature, 2019, 571: 99-102.

[27]
Wimpenny J, Gíslason S R, James R H, et al. The behaviour of Li and Mg isotopes during primary phase dissolution and secondary mineral formation in basalt[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2010, 74(18): 5259-5279.

[28]
Ji H B, Chang C, Beckford H O, et al. New perspectives on lateritic weathering process over karst area: Geochemistry and Si-Li isotopic evidence[J]. Catena, 2021, 198: 105022. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2020.105022.

[29]
Edmond J M. Himalayan tectonics, weathering processes, and the strontium isotope record in marine limestones[J]. Science, 1992, 258: 1594-1597.

PMID

[30]
Galy A, France-Lanord C, Derry L A. The strontium isotopic budget of Himalayan rivers in Nepal and Bangladesh[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 1999, 63(13): 1905-1925.

[31]
Hindshaw R S, Reynolds B C, Wiederhold J G, et al. Calcium isotope fractionation in alpine plants[J]. Biogeochemistry, 2013, 112(1): 373-388.

[32]
Black J R, Epstein E, Rains W D, et al. Magnesium-isotope fractionation during plant growth[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2008, 42(21): 7831-7836.

[33]
Ravizza G, Esser B K. A possible link between the seawater osmium isotope record and weathering of ancient sedimentary organic matter[J]. Chemical Geology, 1993, 107: 255-258.

[34]
Sauzéat L, Rudnick R L, Chauvel C, et al. New perspectives on the Li isotopic composition of the upper continental crust and its weathering signature[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2015, 428: 181-192.

[35]
Liu X M, Rudnick R L, McDonough W F, et al. Influence of chemical weathering on the composition of the continental crust: Insights from Li and Nd isotopes in bauxite profiles developed on Columbia River Basalts[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2013, 115: 73-91.

[36]
Vigier N, Decarreau A, Millot R, et al. Quantifying Li isotope fractionation during smectite formation and implications for the Li cycle[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2008, 72(3): 780-792.

[37]
刘英俊. 元素地球化学[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1984.

[Liu Yingjun. Elemental geochemistry. Beijing, China: Science Press, 1984. ]

[38]
Tomascak P B, Magna T, Dohmen R. Advances in lithium isotope geochemistry[M]. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2016.

[39]
Lemarchand E, Chabaux F, Vigier N, et al. Lithium isotope systematics in a forested granitic catchment (Strengbach, Vosges Mountains, France)[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2010, 74(16): 4612-4628.

[40]
Tomascak P B. Developments in the understanding and application of lithium isotopes in the earth and planetary sciences[J]. Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry, 2004, 55(1): 153-195.

[41]
陈瑜, 徐飞, 程宏飞, 等. 锂同位素地球化学研究新进展[J]. 地学前缘, 2023, 30(5): 469-490.

DOI

[Chen Yu, Xu Fei, Cheng Hongfei, et al. Lithium isotope geochemistry: A review. Earth Science Frontiers, 2023, 30(5): 469-490. ]

[42]
Liu J Y, Liu Q Y, Meng Q Q, et al. The distribution of lithium in nature and the application of lithium isotope tracing[J]. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2020, 600(1): 012018. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/600/1/012018.

[43]
Chan L H, Lassiter J C, Hauri E H, et al. Lithium isotope systematics of lavas from the Cook-Austral Islands: Constraints on the origin of HIMU mantle[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2009, 277(3/4): 433-442.

[44]
苟龙飞, 金章东, 贺茂勇. 锂同位素示踪大陆风化: 进展与挑战[J]. 地球环境学报, 2017, 8(2): 89-102.

[Gou Longfei, Jin Zhangdong, He Maoyong. Using lithium isotopes traces continental weathering: Progresses and challenges. Journal of Earth Environment, 2017, 8(2): 89-102. ]

[45]
Rudnick R L, Tomascak P B, Njo H B, et al. Extreme lithium isotopic fractionation during continental weathering revealed in saprolites from South Carolina[J]. Chemical Geology, 2004, 212: 45-57.

[46]
Millot R, Vigier N, Gaillardet J. Behaviour of lithium and its isotopes during weathering in the Mackenzie Basin, Canada[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2010, 74(14): 3897-3912.

[47]
Wunder B, Meixner A, Romer R L, et al. Temperature-dependent isotopic fractionation of lithium between clinopyroxene and high-pressure hydrous fluids[J]. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 2006, 151: 112-120.

[48]
汤艳杰, 张宏福, 英基丰. 锂同位素分馏机制讨论[J]. 地球科学, 2009, 34(1): 43-55.

[Tang Yanjie, Zhang Hongfu, Ying Jifeng. Discussion on fractionation mechanism of lithium isotopes. Earth Science, 2009, 34(1): 43-55. ]

[49]
Pistiner J S, Henderson G M. Lithium-isotope fractionation during continental weathering processes[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2003, 214(1/2): 327-339.

[50]
Chan L H, Edmond J M. Variation of lithium isotope composition in the marine environment: A preliminary report[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 1988, 52(6): 1711-1717.

[51]
Ryu J S, Vigier N, Lee S W, et al. Variation of lithium isotope geochemistry during basalt weathering and secondary mineral transformations in Hawaii[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2014, 145: 103-115.

[52]
Meier A L. Determination of lithium isotopes at natural abundance levels by atomic absorption spectrometry[J]. Analytical Chemistry, 1982, 54(13): 2158-2161.

[53]
Vils F, Pelletier L, Kalt A, et al. The lithium, boron and beryllium content of serpentinized peridotites from ODP Leg 209 (Sites 1272A and 1274A): Implications for lithium and boron budgets of oceanic lithosphere[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2008, 72(22): 5475-5504.

[54]
MacPherson G L, Phan T T, Stewart B W. Direct determination (without chromatographic separation) of lithium isotopes in saline fluids using MC-ICP-MS: Establishing limits on water chemistry[J]. Journal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry, 2015, 30(7): 1673-1678.

[55]
郑永飞, 徐宝龙, 周根陶. 矿物稳定同位素地球化学研究[J]. 地学前缘, 2000, 7(2): 299-320.

[Zheng Yongfei, Xu Baolong, Zhou Gentao. Geochemical studies of stable isotopes in minerals. Earth Science Frontiers, 2000, 7(2): 299-320. ]

[56]
Coogan L A, Kasemann S A, Chakraborty S. Rates of hydrothermal cooling of new oceanic upper crust derived from lithium-geospeedometry[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2005, 240(2): 415-424.

[57]
Huh Y, Chan L H, Zhang L B, et al. Lithium and its isotopes in major world rivers: Implications for weathering and the oceanic budget[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 1998, 62(12): 2039-2051.

[58]
Kisakürek B, James R H, Harris N B W. Li and δ7Li in Himalayan rivers: Proxies for silicate weathering?[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2005, 237(3/4): 387-401.

[59]
Tong F T, Xiao Y L, Sun H, et al. Lithium isotopic features of Quaternary basaltic saprolite, Zhanjiang, China: Atmospheric input and clay-mineral adsorption[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2021, 785: 147235. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147235.

[60]
Wang Q L, Chetelat B J, Zhao Z Q, et al. Behavior of lithium isotopes in the Changjiang River system: Sources effects and response to weathering and erosion[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2015, 151: 117-132.

[61]
Tomascak P B, Hemming N G, Hemming S R. The lithium isotopic composition of waters of the Mono Basin, California[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2003, 67(4): 601-611.

[62]
Verney-Carron A, Vigier N, Millot R. Experimental determination of the role of diffusion on Li isotope fractionation during basaltic glass weathering[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2011, 75(12): 3452-3468.

[63]
Wimpenny J, Colla C A, Yu P, et al. Lithium isotope fractionation during uptake by gibbsite[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2015, 168: 133-150.

[64]
Urey H C. The thermodynamic properties of isotopic substances[J]. Journal of the Chemical Society, 1947: 562-581. doi: 10.1039/jr9470000562.

[65]
Schauble E A. Applying stable isotope fractionation theory to new systems[J]. Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry, 2004, 55(1): 65-111.

[66]
Li C T, Peacor D R. The crystal structure of LiAlSi2O6-II ("β spodumene")[J]. Zeitschrift für Kristallographie (Crystalline Materials), 1968, 126: 46-65.

[67]
莫申国, 张百平, 程维明, 等. 青藏高原的主要环境效应[J]. 地理科学进展, 2004, 23(2): 88-96.

[Mo Shenguo, Zhang Baiping, Cheng Weiming, et al. Major environmental effects of the Tibetan Plateau. Progress in Geography, 2004, 23(2): 88-96. ]

DOI

[68]
Pogge von Strandmann P A E, Dellinger M, West A J. Lithium isotopes: A tracer of past and present silicate weathering[M]. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2021: 1-17.

[69]
Huh Y, Chan L H, Chadwick O A. Behavior of lithium and its isotopes during weathering of Hawaiian basalt[J]. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 2004, 5(9): Q09002. doi: 10.1029/2004GC000729.

[70]
Decarreau A, Vigier N, Pálková H, et al. Partitioning of lithium between smectite and solution: An experimental approach[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2012, 85: 314-325.

[71]
张俊文, 闫雅妮, 孟俊伦, 等. 大兴安岭地区花岗岩风化过程中锂同位素地球化学行为[J]. 矿物岩石地球化学通报, 2023, 42(4): 873-881.

[Zhang Junwen, Yan Yani, Meng Junlun, et al. Lithium isotope geochemical behavior in the weathering process of granites in the Greater Khingan Mountain area, Northeastern China. Bulletin of Mineralogy, Petrology and Geochemistry, 2023, 42(4): 873-881. ]

[72]
Pogge von Strandmann P A E, Liu X Y, Liu C Y, et al. Lithium isotope behaviour during basalt weathering experiments amended with organic acids[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2022, 328: 37-57.

[73]
Zhu G H, Ma J L, Wei G J, et al. Lithium isotope fractionation during the weathering of granite: Responses to pH[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2023, 345: 117-129.

[74]
张俊文. 花岗岩风化过程锂同位素行为及其环境指示意义[D]. 武汉: 中国地质大学, 2018.

[Zhang Junwen. Behavior of lithium isotopes and environmental indications during granite weathering. Wuhan, China: China University of Geosciences, 2018. ]

[75]
Zhang J W, Zhao Z Q, Li X D, et al. Extremely enrichment of 7Li in highly weathered saprolites developed on granite from Huizhou, Southern China[J]. Applied Geochemistry, 2021, 125: 104825. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeochem.2020.104825.

[76]
Zhang J W, Zhao Z Q, Yan Y N, et al. Lithium and its isotopes behavior during incipient weathering of granite in the eastern Tibetan Plateau, China[J]. Chemical Geology, 2021, 559: 119969. doi: 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2020.119969.

[77]
仝凤台. 典型硅酸盐风化过程的锂同位素地球化学行为[D]. 合肥: 中国科学技术大学, 2021.

[Tong Fengtai. Lithium isotopes geochemical behavior in typical silicate weathering process. Hefei, China: University of Science and Technology of China, 2021. ]

[78]
刘文景. 江西龙南花岗岩风化过程的元素和Sr、Li同位素地球化学特征及其指示意义研究[D]. 北京: 中国科学院大学, 2013.

[Liu Wenjing. Element, Strontium, and Lithium Isotope geochemical features and their implications for weathering processes of granite in Longnan, Jiangxi Province, South China. Beijing, China: University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2013. ]

[79]
Teng F Z, Li W Y, Rudnick R L, et al. Contrasting lithium and magnesium isotope fractionation during continental weathering[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2010, 300(1/2): 63-71.

[80]
常成. 喀斯特地区云南石林典型红色风化壳的地球化学特征[D]. 北京: 北京科技大学, 2023.

[Chang Cheng. Geochemical characteristics of typical red weathering crust in karst area Shilin, Yunnan Province. Beijing, China: University of Science and Technology Beijing, 2023. ]

[81]
Steinhoefel G, Brantley S L, Fantle M S. Lithium isotopic fractionation during weathering and erosion of shale[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2021, 295: 155-177.

DOI

[82]
Clergue C, Dellinger M, Buss H L, et al. Influence of atmospheric deposits and secondary minerals on Li isotopes budget in a highly weathered catchment, Guadeloupe (Lesser Antilles)[J]. Chemical Geology, 2015, 414: 28-41.

[83]
Chapela Lara M, Buss H L, Henehan M J, et al. Secondary minerals drive extreme lithium isotope fractionation during tropical weathering[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface, 2022, 127(2): e2021JF006366. doi: 10.1029/2021JF006366.

[84]
杨承帆, 杨守业, 苟龙飞, 等. 锂同位素示踪表生风化与环境演变: 回顾与展望[J]. 矿物岩石地球化学通报, 2018, 37(5): 841-851.

[Yang Chengfan, Yang Shouye, Gou Longfei, et al. Lithium isotopes for tracing the supergene weathering and environmental evolution: Review and prospective. Bulletin of Mineralogy, Petrology and Geochemistry, 2018, 37(5): 841-851. ]

[85]
Huh Y, Chan L H, Edmond J M. Lithium isotopes as a probe of weathering processes: Orinoco River[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2001, 194(1/2): 189-199.

[86]
Verney-Carron A, Vigier N, Millot R, et al. Lithium isotopes in hydrothermally altered basalts from Hengill (SW Iceland)[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2015, 411: 62-71.

[87]
Ollier C D. Deep weathering, groundwater and climate[J]. Geografiska Annaler Series A: Physical Geography, 1988, 70(4): 285-290.

[88]
李德文, 崔之久, 刘耕年. 风化壳研究的现状与展望[J]. 地球学报, 2002, 23(3): 283-288.

[Li Dewen, Cui Zhijiu, Liu Gengnian. Present situation and prospects of researches on weathering crust. Acta Geoscientica Sinica, 2002, 23(3): 283-288. ]

[89]
Kisakürek B, Widdowson M, James R H. Behaviour of Li isotopes during continental weathering: The Bidar laterite profile, India[J]. Chemical Geology, 2004, 212: 27-44.

[90]
Li W S, Liu X M, Chadwick O A. Lithium isotope behavior in Hawaiian regoliths: Soil-atmosphere-biosphere exchanges[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2020, 285: 175-192.

[91]
Xiong Y W, Qi H W, Hu R Z, et al. Lithium isotope behavior under extreme tropical weathering: A case study of basalts from the Hainan Island, South China[J]. Applied Geochemistry, 2022, 140: 105295. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeochem.2022.105295.

[92]
Dellinger M, Gaillardet J, Bouchez J, et al. Riverine Li isotope fractionation in the Amazon River Basin controlled by the weathering regimes[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2015, 164: 71-93.

[93]
Bouchez J, von Blanckenburg F, Schuessler J A. Modeling novel stable isotope ratios in the weathering zone[J]. American Journal of Science, 2013, 313(4): 267-308.

[94]
Millot R, érôme Gaillardet J, Dupré B, et al. Northern latitude chemical weathering rates: Clues from the Mackenzie River Basin, Canada[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2003, 67(7): 1305-1329.

[95]
Gou L F, Jin Z D, Pogge von Strandmann P A E, et al. Li isotopes in the middle Yellow River: Seasonal variability, sources and fractionation[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2019, 248: 88-108.

[96]
Pogge von Strandmann P A E, Henderson G M. The Li isotope response to mountain uplift[J]. Geology, 2015, 43(1): 67-70.

[97]
Pogge von Strandmann P A E, Frings P J, Murphy M J. Lithium isotope behaviour during weathering in the Ganges Alluvial Plain[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2017, 198: 17-31.

[98]
Gou L F, Xu Y, Tong F T, et al. Li isotopic seasonality in a small catchment at the northeastern Tibetan Plateau: Roles of hydrology and temperature dependency[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2023, 870: 161896. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.161896.

[99]
Ma T T, Weynell M, Li S L, et al. Lithium isotope compositions of the Yangtze River headwaters: Weathering in high-relief catchments[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2020, 280: 46-65.

[100]
Henchiri S, Clergue C, Dellinger M, et al. The influence of hydrothermal activity on the Li isotopic signature of rivers draining volcanic areas[J]. Procedia Earth and Planetary Science, 2014, 10: 223-230.

[101]
Pogge von Strandmann P A E, Burton K W, James R H, et al. Riverine behaviour of uranium and lithium isotopes in an actively glaciated basaltic terrain[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2006, 251(1/2): 134-147.

[102]
张俊文, 闫雅妮, 赵志琦, 等. 青藏高原山地小河流溶解态Li同位素地球化学行为: 以尼洋河为例[J]. 中国科学: 地球科学, 2023, 53(8): 1886-1897.

[Zhang Junwen, Yan Yani, Zhao Zhiqi, et al. Geochemical behavior of lithium isotopes in a small mountainous river of the Tibetan Plateau: A case study from Niyang River. Scientia Sinica (Terrae), 2023, 53(8): 1886-1897. ]

[103]
Weynell M, Wiechert U, Schuessler J A. Lithium isotope signatures of weathering in the hyper-arid climate of the western Tibetan Plateau[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2021, 293: 205-223.

DOI

[104]
宋以龙. 我国大型河流流域硅酸盐岩风化过程的锂同位素制约[D]. 天津: 天津大学, 2021.

[Song Yilong. Continental silicate weathering processes traced by Li isotopes in Chinese large rivers. Tianjin, China: Tianjin University, 2021. ]

[105]
Riebe C S, Kirchner J W, Finkel R C. Erosional and climatic effects on long-term chemical weathering rates in granitic landscapes spanning diverse climate regimes[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2004, 224(3/4): 547-562.

[106]
Pogge von Strandmann P A E, Kasemann S A, Wimpenny J B. Lithium and lithium isotopes in earth's surface cycles[J]. Elements, 2020, 16(4): 253-258.

[107]
Golla J K, Kuessner M L, Henehan M J, et al. The evolution of lithium isotope signatures in fluids draining actively weathering hillslopes[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2021, 567: 116988. doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2021.116988.

[108]
Winnick M J, Druhan J L, Maher K. Weathering intensity and lithium isotopes: A reactive transport perspective[J]. American Journal of Science, 2022, 322(5): 647-682.

[109]
傅寒晶, 简星, 梁杭海. 硅酸盐化学风化强度评估的沉积物指标与方法研究进展[J]. 古地理学报, 2021, 23(6): 1192-1209.

[Fu Hanjing, Jian Xing, Liang Hanghai. Research progress of sediment indicators and methods for evaluation of silicate chemical weathering intensity. Journal of Palaeogeography, 2021, 23(6): 1192-1209. ]

[110]
Pogge von Strandmann P A E, Opfergelt S, Lai Y J, et al. Lithium, magnesium and silicon isotope behaviour accompanying weathering in a basaltic soil and pore water profile in Iceland[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2012, 339-340: 11-23.

[111]
蔡晓娟, 季宏兵. 石林红土风化剖面锂同位素特征[J]. 金属世界, 2019(1): 42-44.

[Cai Xiaojuan, Ji Hongbing. Lithium isotope characteristics of red weatheres crustal shell in Shi Lin. Metal World, 2019(1): 42-44. ]

[112]
He M Y, Dong J B, Jin Z D, et al. Pedogenic processes in loess-paleosol sediments: Clues from Li isotopes of leachate in Luochuan loess[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2021, 299: 151-162.

[113]
Tsai P H, You C F, Huang K F, et al. Lithium distribution and isotopic fractionation during chemical weathering and soil formation in a loess profile[J]. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 2014, 87: 1-10.

[114]
Teng F Z, McDonough W F, Rudnick R L, et al. Lithium isotopic composition and concentration of the upper continental crust[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2004, 68(20): 4167-4178.

[115]
Nesbitt H W, Young G M. Early Proterozoic climates and plate motions inferred from major element chemistry of lutites[J]. Nature, 1982, 299: 715-717.

[116]
Torres M A, Moosdorf N, Hartmann J, et al. Glacial weathering, sulfide oxidation, and global carbon cycle feedbacks[J]. PNAS, 2017, 114(33): 8716-8721.

DOI PMID

[117]
Soulet G, Hilton R G, Garnett M H, et al. Temperature control on CO2 emissions from the weathering of sedimentary rocks[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2021, 14(9): 665-671.

[118]
叶玮, 朱丽东, 李凤全, 等. 中国中亚热带网纹红土的地球化学特征与沉积环境[J]. 土壤学报, 2008, 45(3): 385-391.

[Ye Wei, Zhu Lidong, Li Fengquan, et al. Sedimentary environment of vermicular red earth in mid-subtropical China. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2008, 45(3): 385-391. ]

[119]
Long X Y, Ji J F, Balsam W. Rainfall-dependent transformations of iron oxides in a tropical saprolite transect of Hainan Island, South China: Spectral and magnetic measurements[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research (Earth Surface), 2011, 116: F03015. doi: 10.1029/2010JF001712.

[120]
朱丽东, 谷喜吉, 叶玮, 等. 洞庭湖周边地区第四纪红土粒度特征及环境意义[J]. 地理科学进展, 2014, 33(1): 13-22.

DOI

[Zhu Lidong, Gu Xiji, Ye Wei. et al. Grain-size features of Quaternary red earth in Dongting Lake Area and their paleoenvironmental significance. Progress in Geography, 2014, 33(1): 13-22. ]

DOI

Outlines

/