The preferential localization of Fe–Ni–Cu–PGE sulfides within the horizontal components of dike–sill–lava flow complexes in large igneous provinces (LIPs) indicates that they were fluid dynamic traps for sulfide melts. Many authors have interpreted them to have collected sulfide droplets transported upwards, often from deeper “staging chambers”. Although fine (<1–2 cm) dilute (<10%–15%) suspensions of dense (∼4–5 g/cm3) sulfide melt can be transported in ascending magmas, there are several problems with upward-transport models for almost all LIP-related deposits: (1) S isotopic data are consistent with nearby crustal sources, (2) xenoliths appear to be derived from nearby rather than deeper crustal sources, (3) lateral sheet flow or sill facies of major deposits contain few if any sulfides, (4) except where there is evidence for a local S source, sulfides or chalcophile element enrichments rarely if ever occur in the volcanic components even where there is mineralization in the subvolcanic plumbing system, and (5) some lavas are mildly to strongly depleted in PGE >>> Cu > Ni > Co, indicating that unerupted sulfides sequestered PGEs at depth. Two potential solutions to this paradox are that (i) natural systems contained surfactants that lowered sulfide–silicate interfacial tensions, permitting sulfide melts to coalesce and settle more easily than predicted from theoretical/experimental studies of artificial/analog systems, and (or) (ii) sulfides existed not as uniformly dispersed droplets, as normally assumed, but as fluid-dynamically coherent pseudoslugs or pseudolayers that were large and dense enough that they could not be transported upwards. Regardless of the ultimate explanation, it seems likely that most high-grade Ni–Cu–PGE sulfide deposits in LIPs formed at or above the same stratigraphic levels as they are found.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
Research Article|
March 04, 2019
Up, down, or sideways: emplacement of magmatic Fe–Ni–Cu–PGE sulfide melts in large igneous provinces1
C.M. Lesher
Mineral Exploration Research Centre, Harquail School of Earth Sciences, Goodman School of Mines, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON P3E 2C6, Canada.
Email for correspondence:[email protected].
Search for other works by this author on:
Email for correspondence:[email protected].
Publisher: Canadian Science Publishing
Received:
02 Jul 2018
Accepted:
23 Feb 2019
First Online:
23 Jul 2019
Online ISSN: 1480-3313
Print ISSN: 0008-4077
Published by NRC Research Press
Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences (2019) 56 (7): 756–773.
Article history
Received:
02 Jul 2018
Accepted:
23 Feb 2019
First Online:
23 Jul 2019
Citation
C.M. Lesher; Up, down, or sideways: emplacement of magmatic Fe–Ni–Cu–PGE sulfide melts in large igneous provinces. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 2019;; 56 (7): 756–773. doi: https://doi.org/10.1139/cjes-2018-0177
Download citation file:
You could not be signed in. Please check your email address / username and password and try again.
Email alerts
Index Terms/Descriptors
Citing articles via
Related Articles
Low-Sulfide Platinum Group Element Ores of the Norilsk-Talnakh Camp
Economic Geology
Improving Multiscale Structural Targeting Precision for Large Ni-Cu (±PGE, Co) Sulfide Discoveries from Global Case Studies
Economic Geology
Related Book Content
Dyke emplacement and crustal structure within a continental large igneous province, northern Barents Sea
Circum-Arctic Lithosphere Evolution
The Ferrar Large Igneous Province: field and geochemical constraints on supra-crustal (high-level) emplacement of the magmatic system
Large Igneous Provinces from Gondwana and Adjacent Regions
Anhydrite Assimilation by Ultramafic Melts of the Bushveld Complex, and Its Consequences to Petrology and Mineralization
Metals, Minerals, and Society
CHAPTER 22: Ni–Cu–Cr–PGE MINERALIZATION TYPES: DISTRIBUTION AND CLASSIFICATION
Exploration for Platinum-Group Element Deposits