Peridotite and pyroxenite xenoliths from the Muskox kimberlite, northern Slave craton, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present petrography, mineralogy, and thermobarometry for 53 mantle-derived xenoliths from the Muskox kimberlite pipe in the northern Slave craton. The xenolith suite includes 23% coarse peridotite, 9% porphyroclastic peridotite, 60% websterite, and 8% orthopyroxenite. Samples primarily comprise forsteritic olivine (Fo 89–94), enstatite (En 89–94), Cr-diopside, Cr-pyrope garnet, and chromite spinel. Coarse peridotites, porphyroclastic peridotites, and pyroxenites equilibrated at 650–1220 °C and 23–63 kbar (1 kbar = 100 MPa), 1200–1350 °C and 57–70 kbar, and 1030–1230 °C and 50–63 kbar, respectively. The Muskox xenoliths differ from xenoliths in the neighboring and contemporaneous Jericho kimberlite by their higher levels of depletion, the presence of a shallow zone of metasomatism in the spinel peridotite field, a higher proportion of pyroxenites at the base of the mantle column, higher Cr2O3 in all pyroxenite minerals, and weaker deformation in the Muskox mantle. We interpret these contrasts as representing small-scale heterogeneities in the bulk composition of the mantle, as well as the local effects of interaction between metasomatizing fluid and mantle wall rocks. We suggest that asthenosphere-derived pre-kimberlitic melts and fluids percolated less effectively through the less permeable Muskox mantle, resulting in lower degrees of hydrous weakening, strain, and fertilization of the peridotitic mantle. Fluids tended to concentrate and pool in the deep mantle, causing partial melting and formation of abundant pyroxenites.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".