Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Archean:
Phanerozoic:
1. Chromite(Stratiform)
2. PGM 1. Phosphorites: Proterozoic –
3. Cu- Fe – Ni Cambrian boundary
4. Au 2. Podiform (Alpine type)
5. Some VMS chromite
Proterozoic: 3. Coal: Carboniferous
4. PCD’s (Mesozoic)
1. Placer Au & U deposits 5. Residual (Cretaceous – Recent).
2. PGM
3. Chromite
4. BIF
5. Fe – Ti oxides with anorthosite
massifs.
6. Diamonds in kimberlites
7. Sediment hosted Cu
Introduction: Chromite
Deposits
Chromite: It’s composition and uses-
Chromite (FeCr₂O₄) is a mineral of the spinel group.
(Mg,Fe²+)(Cr,AI,Fe³+)2O4.
Additionally due to the very low solubility of chromium in basaltic magmas the
accumulation of stratiform chromitite layers must have involved the processing
of tremendous volumes of magma.
Stratiform Deposits: Origin/Petrogenesis
4. Hydration of magma
Stratiform Deposits: Origin/Petrogenesis
● Cumulate texture ,cyclical layering, silicate gangue minerals are all evidence
of a magmatic origin
● The mechanism by which chromite is precipitated is not so well understood
● It is not clear why chromite are abundant in some mantle sections and
totally absent in others(Roberts,1988)
● Johan et al.(1983) and Auge(1987) suggested that chromium can be extracted
from magmas by a fluid phase, but there is no experimental evidence to
support this interpretation
● Contaminations by wall rock assimilation was proposed for chromite
formation in the Muskox(Irvine.1975)& Kemi(Alapeti et al.,1989) layered
intrusions because alkali rich inclusions occur in Chromites from these
bodies.
Podiform Deposit: Origin
● Most podiform chromite have dunite envelopes which grade outward into
harzburgite
● These envelopes are believed to have formed by melt rock interaction in the
same manner as dunite around many dikes in peridotite
(Dick,1977;Quick,1981;Bodinier et al.,1990;Dick and Natland,1995)
● As batches of relatively primitive, mafic magma rise through the host
peridotite, pyroxenes are dissolved from the wall rock, leaving behind a
dunite residue a few centimeters thick.
● The characteristic occurrence of dunite envelopes around podiform
chromites suggests a genetic relationship between the two
Podiform Deposit: Origin
● Removal of pyroxenes from the host peridotite by melt rock reaction would
increase the silica content of the magma as demonstrated by experimental
results(Fisk,1986;Kelemen et al.,1990)
● Such an increase in silica would move the melts from the olivine-chromite
cotectic into the primary phase field of chromite
● Once the melt has moved into the chromite stability field and chromite
starts to precipitate, the melt would migrate towards the olivine chromite
co-tectic, when olivine and chromite would again precipitate together.
● Batches of new magma rising through the conduit would mix with the
fractionated melts, moving them back into the chromite stability field.
Podiform Deposit: Origin
Podiform Deposit: Origin
High Cr Chromitite
Beneath island arcs there is a high input of volatiles from the subducted slab
into the overlying mantle wedge leading to high degrees of partial melting and
the formation of boninitic or highly depleted tholeiitic melts. In this
environment the old lithospheric mantle immediately beneath the crust will be
invaded by large volumes of melt generated at depth by melting of depleted
harzburgites. The new magma will rise through and react with the old mantle
producing pods of high Cr chromitites with dunite envelopes.
Podiform Deposits: Tectonic Setting(s)
However some podiform chromitites could still form from melt-rock reactions
because melt compositions in these environment may change with time. For
example in Troodos ophiolite of Cyprus the melt became increasingly depleted
in time changing from highly enriched andesites and dacites to depleted tholeiite
to highly depleted boninites. Such depleted melt presumably form at depth
either by partial melting or remelting of progressively depleted source
(Crawford 1989). As the melt separate out from their source rocks and move
upwards through the mantle, they are no longer in equilibrium with the host
rocks and would react with them.
In nascent spreading centres such as in back arc basin, melts will still be
generated in mantle wedges above subduction zone but less volatiles are added to
the wedge and the degree of partial melting is lower. The lower degree of partial
melting will produce less depleted magmas from which high Al chromites
crystallize. Melt generated by partial melting will rise into the pre-existing
lithospheric mantle which is thinned during spreading. As the melt passes
through the upper asthenosphere and lithospheric mantle, they react with the
wall rocks and precipitates high Al chromitites. However these melt are not far as
out of equilibrium with their host rocks as those beneath island arcs and less
reaction takes place. The residual peridotites formed in this environment would
be moderately depleted Cpx bearing harzburgites or lherzolites.
Beneath mature spreading centres such as those of mid oceanic ridges, pre-
existing lithospheric mantle is thinned and removed during spreading MORB
magmas remain remarkably constant through time. Thus magmas formed at
depth are relatively equilibrated with the wall rocks through which they pass and
little reaction takes place. Because the magma composition would not be
modified significantly by melt-rock reaction, no large chromite bodies will form.
Podiform Deposits: Tectonic Setting(s)
“Podiform chromitites” may mean chromitites that have pod-like bodies, but the
form of chromitite bodies is variable.
Specific varieties include nodular, orbicular and anti nodular types, found only
in ophiolitic chromitites, as well as banded, vein, net, breccia and schlieren
microstructures.
Petrography and Textures :
(1) A “compact” type with little scarce intergranular space, made up of large
equidimensional grains of chromite that may show curved faces and/or triple
junctions.
FIG 6. Photographs (a), (k) and (m) are from the Mayarí-Baracoa ophiolite, Cuba;
(b), (c), (d), (e), (g), (h), (i), and (l) Lycian ophiolite, southwestern Turkey.
Sources:
a representation of
an idea, an object
or even a process
or a system that is
used to describe
and explain
phenomena that
cannot be
experienced
directly
Stratiform:
Magma Mixing
Somewhat Accepted Model(s)
Increase in total pressure within the magma chamber (Cameron, 1977; Lipin,
1993; Cawthorn, 2005), or an increase in pressure due to shock waves associated
with earthquakes (Cawthorn, 2015), assimilation by the parental magma of
siliceous country rocks or roof rocks (Irvine, 1975; Kinnaird et al., 2002;Spandler
et al., 2005), mixing of a primitive (ultramafic U-type) and an evolved
(anorthositic A-type) magma (e.g., Sharpe and Irvine, 1983), or mixing of
magmas of differing temperatures and fO2 (Cameron and Desborough, 1969;
Ulmer, 1969; Murck and Campbell, 1986), replenishment of the magma chamber
by chromite-crystal bearing mush (e.g., Eales, 2000; Mondal and Mathez,2007;
Eales and Costin, 2012), and lastly, the addition of water (e.g., Nicholson and
Mathez, 1991;Sisson and Grove, 1993; Gaetani et al., 1994).[]
Possibly the most Widely Accepted Model
Magma Mixing: Irvine (1977) showed that in the MgO-Cr 2 O 3 -SiO 2 system
mixing of a chemically primitive melt on the olivine-chromite cotectic with a
more evolved cotectic melt or even one saturated in orthopyroxene may result in
a mixture saturated in chromite alone, as a result of the manner in which the
olivine-chromite cotectic is curved.
Irvine (1975) proposed that chromitite layers may have formed by the
contamination of mafic magma by silica from digestion of granitic roof rocks.
He subsequently rejected the idea, pointing out that the addition of alkalis would
shift the olivine-orthopyroxene reaction boundary toward silica such that
‘geologically improbable amounts of contamination would be required to induce
the crystallization change.
Nicholson & Mathez (1991) proposed that the thin chromitite seams of the
Merensky Reef formed at fronts of hydrous interstitial melt migrating through
the crystal pile. BUT The formation of a chromitite by this mechanism would
require dissolution of about 50 times its mass in clinopyroxene and nearly 100
times its mass in orthopyroxene, based on the observed Cr contents of these
minerals.
Podiform: Melt-Rock
(inter/re)action
The reaction between harzburgite and magma is an essential process in the
formation of silica-rich magmas and dunitic residues (e.g., Araiand Yurimoto,
1994, 1995; Arai, 1997) along the melt conduit in the mantle (Lago et al., 1982).
The silica-rich magma thus formed, is mixed in the mantle melt conduit with a
subsequently supplied less modified, olivine-chromite saturated, melt to form
chromite-oversaturated melts which precipitate solely chromites (= chromitites)
in varied textural manifestations
Mantle-derived olivine-chromite saturated melt (A) reacted with orthopyroxene of the harzburgite to
form silica-rich melt (B) and dunite. The silica-rich melt (B) mixed with the intact mantle-derived melt
(A) to produce a chromite-oversaturated melt (C), which precipitated only chromite to form chromitites.
(Arai and Makoto, 2016)
Small-scale chromitite from Wadi Hilti, Oman ophiolite.
Arai and Miura (2016)
Wall-rock chemical control of chromitite formation. (a) Hypothetical system olivine-SiO 2-chromite (Cr-spinel + Al-
spinel). (b) A high-Cr# system. PM is primary magma. SM is secondary silica-rich magma formed by the reaction. (c)
A low-Cr# system. (d, f) Photomicrographs of olivine-rich reaction products between orthopyroxene in peridotite
xenoliths (d, harzburgite; e, lherzolite) and the host alkali basalt from Kawashimo, Japan. Note the chromite
concentration only around the harzburgite orthopyroxene. (Arai and Miura 2016
The large-scale system needed for chromitite formation. A large space for Cr uptake through a magma-peridotite
reaction is indispensable for formation of chromitite in a limited space. If a large area for Cr uptake is available,
chromitites can be formed even within highly depleted harzburgite. (Arai and Miura 2016)
High -AI
High-Cr
Lithos, 177 (2013), pp. 314-327 Lithos, 232 (2015), pp. 143-149
STATE LOCATION
Misra, Kula. Understanding mineral deposits. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012.
Roberts, Stephen, and Christopher Neary. "Petrogenesis of ophiolitic chromitite." Geological Society,
London, Special Publications 76.1 (1993): 257-272.
Arai, Shoji. "Origin of podiform chromitites." Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 15.2-3 (1997): 303-310.
Ballhaus, Chris. "Origin of podiform chromite deposits by magma mingling." Earth and Planetary
Science Letters 156.3-4 (1998): 185-193.
Mukherjee, Ria, et al. "Compositional variations in the Mesoarchean chromites of the Nuggihalli schist
belt, Western Dharwar Craton (India): potential parental melts and implications for tectonic setting."
Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 160.6 (2010): 865-885.
Lago, Bernard L., MICHEL RABINOWICZ, and ADOLPHE NICOLAS. "Podiform chromite ore bodies: a
genetic model." Journal of Petrology 23.1 (1982): 103-125.
Robinson, Paul T., et al. "Podiform chromitites: their composition, origin and environment of formation."
Episodes (1997).
Deb, S., and K. L. Chakraborty. "Origin of chromite deposits associated with the ultrabasic rocks of the
eastern part of the Indian peninsula." Proceedings of the National Institute of Sciences of India Part A,
Physical sciences. Vol. 27. No. 5. 1962.
ZHOU, Mei‐Fu, et al. "Crystallization of podiform chromitites from silicate magmas and the formation of
nodular textures." Resource Geology 51.1 (2001): 1-6.
Schulte, Ruth F., et al. Stratiform chromite deposit model. No. 2010-1232. US Geological Survey, 2010.
Pearce, Julian A., S. J. Lippard, and S. Roberts. "Characteristics and tectonic significance of supra-
subduction zone ophiolites." Geological Society, London, Special Publications 16.1 (1984): 77-94.
Stowe, Clive William. "Compositions and tectonic settings of chromite deposits through time." Economic
Geology 89.3 (1994): 528-546.