Paleozoic U-Pb age of rutile inclusions in diamonds of the V–VII variety from placers of the northeast Siberian platform

Afanasyev, V. P.; Agashev, A. M.; Orihashi, Y.; Pokhilenko, N. P.; Sobolev, N. V.

doi:10.1134/s1028334x09070253

Cited by 26 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These diamonds have similar morphological features to the dark grey rounded diamonds which are widespread in the alluvial placers of the northeastern part of the Siberian platform [3][4][5][6][7]. They are classified as variety V with aggregates of variety VII, according to the Yu.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Specific Internal Structure of Diamonds from Zarnitsa Kimberlite Pipe

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The Zarnitsa kimberlite pipe is one of the largest pipes of the Yakutian diamondiferous province. Currently, some limited published data exists on the diamonds from this deposit. Among the diamond population of this pipe there is a specific series of dark gray to black diamonds with transition morphologies between octahedron and rounded rhombic dodecahedron. These diamonds have specific zonal and sectorial mosaic-block internal structures. The inner parts of these crystals have polycrystalline structure with significant misorientations between sub-individuals. The high consistency of the mechanical admixtures (inclusions) in the diamonds cores can cause a high grid stress of the crystal structure and promote the block (polycrystalline) structure of the core components. These diamond crystals have subsequently been formed due to crystallization of bigger sub-individuals on the polycrystalline cores according to the geometric selection law.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Specific Internal Structure of Diamonds from Zarnitsa Kimberlite Pipe

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The 356 ± 54 Ma rutile U-Pb age of the variety VII diamond estimated by A. Agashev (Afanasiev et al, 2009) contradicts the above arguments, though does not disprove them. This inconsistency only means that further geochronologi cal studies are required to resolve the problem.…”

Section: Primary Deposits Of Placer Diamondsmentioning

confidence: 75%

Placer diamond potential of the siberian craton: possible sources and ages

2011

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many diamond placers in the Siberian craton are heterogeneous consisting of several components that differ in origin and ages of the source. The diamonds are either kimberlite hosted or are exotic varieties which occur mostly in the northeastern craton periphery and come from primary deposits of unknown types and ages. The two groups of diamond placers in the area represent two evolution trends: those found in Mid dle Paleozoic kimberlites originated in the Famennian and the exotic diamond groups became involved in sedimentation in the Carnian. The trends have been associated with successive weathering of older diamond hosts and redeposition of the minerals into younger sediments. Having joined since the Late Triassic, the two trends eventually produced a polygenetic and multistage mixture of diamond groups in placers.

show abstract

“…They do not form the continuous trends and geotherms as is common for other cratons such as Siberia or South Africa but trace four separate levels. Though the crystallization of megacrystalline dunites beneath Udachnaya [212] also refer to separate levels [21][22][23][24][25][26][27]216]. Our opinion that the low-Ca garnet [221] LT geotherms were formed due to the hydrous subduction-related melt percolation in dunitic channels [214][215][216][217][218][219][220][221] possibly occurred during the major event of growth of the continental crust 3.0-2.7 Ga [18,19,210,222], accompanied by hydrous melt percolation and generation of dunite channels in the mantle.…”

Section: Influence Of Protokimberlitic Magmasmentioning

confidence: 79%

“…In general, the Proterozoic kimberlites contain more eclogitic inclusions of various types. The study of the eclogitic diamonds gives information about both plume [223,224] and subduction [225][226][227][228] processes and the formation of the ancient crust [209][210][211][212][213][214][215].…”

Section: Influence Of Protokimberlitic Magmasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thermobarometry of Diamond Inclusions: Evidence Mantle Evolution beneath Siberian Craton and Archean Cratons Worldwide.

Ashchepkov¹,

Logvinova²,

Spetsius³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thermobarometric calculations for mineral inclusions in diamonds provide a systematic comparison of PTXFO2 conditions for different cratons worldwide, using a database of 4440 mineral EPMA analyses. Beneath all cratons, the cold branch of the mantle geotherm (35-32 mWm−2) relates to the sub-Ca garnets and rarely omphacitic diamond inclusions, referring to major continental growth events in Archean. High-temperature plume-related geotherms are common in Proterozoic kimberlites such as Premier, Mesozoic – Roberts Victor etc. and are common in Slave and Siberian cratons. In mobile belts: Limpopo, Magondi, Ural Ural, Khapchan belts and in the marginal parts of cratons like Kimberly Australia pyroxenitic and eclogitic pyroxenes and garnets prevail. The pyropes in the mobile belts are more Fe- and Ca-rich, in central parts of cratons, the peridotitic associations with sub- Ca pyropes prevail. The accretionary complexes like Khapchan and Magondi belts a thick eclogite-pyroxenite lens is highly diamondiferous. Comparison by minerals shows that the PT estimates for clinopyroxenes and orthopyroxene from peridotites and eclogites are representing mainly the middle part of the sub-lithospheric mantle while garnets gives more high-pressure estimates. refer to eclogites and reflect the processes of the differentiation during migration of partial melts. This produces the trends of joint decreasing Mg’ and pressures. The PT for the chromites reflect conditions just above the lithosphere-asthenosphere boundary and mainly were formed due to interaction with the hydrous plume protokimberlite melts. Archean diamond inclusions from Wawa province Canada are represented by Ca-enrich pyropes giving low-temperature conditions. Inclusions from younger kimberlites in Superior and Slave (and Siberian and East European ) cratons show complex high-temperature geotherms due to plumes influence. Peridotite garnets beneath the Amazonian craton indicate complex layering in the lithosphere base and a pyroxene layer in the middle part of SCLM. Diamond inclusions from the Kimberley craton of Australia show the greatest variations in the temperatures and composition.

show abstract

Paleozoic U-Pb age of rutile inclusions in diamonds of the V–VII variety from placers of the northeast Siberian platform

Cited by 26 publications

References 4 publications

Specific Internal Structure of Diamonds from Zarnitsa Kimberlite Pipe

Specific Internal Structure of Diamonds from Zarnitsa Kimberlite Pipe

Placer diamond potential of the siberian craton: possible sources and ages

Thermobarometry of Diamond Inclusions: Evidence Mantle Evolution beneath Siberian Craton and Archean Cratons Worldwide.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About