Petrography of Snap Lake Kimberlite Dyke (Northwest Territories, Canada) and its Interaction with Country Rock Granitoids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carbonate-rich intrusions in contact with felsic rocks theoretically should show the effects of interaction between the two rock types, due to their contrasting compositions. In reality, though, such interaction is rarely reported at kimberlite contacts. We present the first documented case of lithological and mineralogical zonation at the margin of a kimberlite, the Snap Lake dyke, in contact with the wall-rock granitoid. Our detailed petrographic, mineralogical and geochemical study shows that the fresh hypabyssal kimberlite consists of olivine macrocrysts and microcrysts, and phlogopite macrocrysts set in a groundmass of serpentinized monticellite, phlogopite, spinel, perovskite and apatite, with interstitial lizardite and calcite. This typical Group I kimberlite mineralogy does not match the bulk-rock composition, which resembles a Group II micaceous kimberlite. The mismatch between the chemical and mineralogical properties is ascribed to contamination by granitoid xenoliths and metasomatic reactions with the felsic country rocks, the Snap Lake kimberlite has extremely low bulk-Ca compared to other documented Group I kimberlites. Reaction with deuteric H2O and CO2 has led to Ca removal, serpentinization of olivine, replacement of calcite by dolomite, alteration of perovskite and decomposition of apatite. Adjacent to the contact with the host granitoid and in haloes around granitoid clasts, poikilitic phlogopite and lizardite are replaced by subsolidus phlogopite and a multiphase phyllosilicate composed of phlogopite+ lizardite+ chlorite+ talc. A modified isocon analysis accounts for felsic xenolith assimilation and isolates metasomatic changes. Enrichment of altered kimberlites in Si owes solely to xenolith incorporation. The metasomatic ingress of granitoid-derived Al for a limited distance inside the dyke was counteracted by a flux of Mg and Fe to the granitoid. Metasomatic changes in K and Ca tend to be positive in all lithologies of kimberlite and in the granitoids implying distal transport. The combination of xenolith digestion with metasomatic element transport is expected in hybrid zones where kimberlite magmas interact with felsic wall-rocks.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".