Mantle source and petrogenesis of kimberlites from the Foxtrot Kimberlite Field of northern Québec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kimberlite whole rock geochemistry has been under-appreciated in deciphering Group I kimberlite petrogenesis. Although there is considerable debate on the definition of Group I kimberlite, there is agreement on certain characteristics. These include that Group I kimberlites are ultramafic rocks (MgO >15 wt%), have near primitive mantle nickel (~ 1400 ppm) and chromium (~1600 ppm) contents, have close to bulk silicate earth radiogenic isotopic signatures, are volatile rich (predominantly CO2) and have stable isotopic signatures typical of mantle sources. The debate, however, centers on petrogenetic models and parental magmatic compositions of Group I kimberlites. Petrogenetic models include both low degree (<1 %) partial melting of metasomatized asthenospheric mantle (Dalton and Presnall, 1998a; 1998b; Becker and Le Roex, 2006) and, conversely, high degree partial melting (10<20 %) of metasomatized veined asthenospheric mantle (Mitchell, 1995, 2004). Inferred kimberlite parental magma compositions have been suggested to be low silica (<5 wt%) and high CO2 (<44 wt%) melts, as suggested by high-pressure melt experiments conducted on synthetic carbonatized mantle (Dalton & Presnall, 1998a, 1998b), or much higher silica (<30 wt%) and lower CO2 (<12 wt%) melts as suggested by geochemical analysis of aphanitic kimberlite (Price et al., 2000; Kopylova et al., 2007). In an effort to contribute to the resolution of this debate on petrogenic models and parental magma compositions of Group I kimberlites, I have completed a systematic investigation of the whole rock geochemistry and petrology of three kimberlite occurrences in the Foxtrot Kimberlite Field of Northern Quebec. A clear correlation exists between whole rock chemistry, mantle source, and diamond grade of the three Group I kimberlites in the Foxtrot Kimberlite Field. Two phases, olivine and carbonate, dominant theserocks and thus control the kimberlites geochemistry. Electron microprobe analysis of over 800 olivines in the Foxtrot kimberlite indicate that it is predominantly xenocrystic (Mg# (Mg/(Mg+Fe)) of 91.5), largely derived from harzburgite mantle, but the absence of harzburgitic orthopyroxene in the Foxtrot kimberlites suggests that it has been assimilated. Whole rock geochemistry (major and trace elements) of the Foxtrot hypabyssal kimberlite dykes indicate they have chemical characteristics similar to Group I kimberlite from the Slave Province. The olivine content of the Foxtrot kimberlites, and thus their Mg#'s, are positively correlated with diamond abundance indicating that diamond grade is a reflection of the incorporation of harzburgite mantle. These results indicate that Group I kimberlite petrogenesis in the Foxtrot example is best modeled as a mixture of harzburgitic mantle xenocrysts and a carbonate rich fluid, and that the parental magma is silica poor "5 wt %) and CO 2 rich (<40 wt%).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".