Diamond-Silicate-Sulphide-Oxide Textural Relationships in Diamondiferous Eclogites from the Kalahari Craton Revealed by 3D X-Ray Computed Tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract X-ray computed tomography (CT) scanning provides a non-destructive way to image diamonds within their host mantle rocks. The CT scans produce thousands of 2D slices, referred to here as pseudo-thin sections, allowing us to observe the textural relationships between diamonds and the surrounding minerals, such as silicates, oxides, and sulphides. In this study, we present CT scans of 18 diamond-bearing eclogites from three locations across the Kalahari craton. The scans reveal that the diamonds are mostly well-formed, step-faced crystals. These step-faced diamonds are associated with metasomatic textures, either forming in distinct veins that cut through the silicate minerals of the xenoliths or along the grain boundaries between garnet and clinopyroxene. The data suggest that diamonds typically form at the expense of garnet, indicating simultaneous garnet dissolution and diamond-friendly metasomatism. In some cases, diamonds appear in specific planes, though there is no visible evidence of the metasomatic minerals responsible for their formation. These instances may represent original diamond growth through metasomatic alteration of the eclogite, followed by recrystallization that erased signs of the earlier diamond-friendly event. We also find evidence of in situ diamond destruction due to metasomatic modification of the eclogites, linked to silicate- and sulphide-rich metasomatism through melt or fluid percolation along garnet–clinopyroxene grain boundaries. While sulphide-rich metasomatism is common in these eclogites, it does not show a clear spatial or temporal link to diamond-forming metasomatic events. Overall, the textural evidence suggests that these diamondiferous eclogites have experienced multiple stages of both diamond-forming and diamond-destructive metasomatism involving silicate and sulphide-rich fluids over their billions of years in the sub-continental lithospheric mantle.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".