Science, Faculty of
Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences, Department of
DSpace
UBCV
Landoni, Katherine
Master of Science - MSc
University of British Columbia
Olivine crystals are ubiquitous in kimberlites and record petrologic events through all stages of ascent and eruption. Well-preserved olivine from the Leslie kimberlite, NT, Canada elucidates the sequence of events attending kimberlite emplacement. The Leslie kimberlite mainly hosts a single phase of extrusive coherent kimberlite. We used spatially distributed samples (n = 76) from drill core to develop a 3D representation of the Leslie kimberlite. Petrographic investigation defined four distinct olivine populations: phenocrysts, macrocrysts, dunite “nodules”, and mantle xenolith-hosted olivine. SEM imagery, and major and trace element geochemistry were used to characterize and quantify chemical zonation including xenocrystic cores, mid-zones, magmatically crystallized rims, high-Mg rinds, and/or monticellite coronas. Core compositions (Fo85.7 to Fo93.8, NiO ~0.36 wt%) and other textural evidence show that cores are mantle-derived olivine xenocrysts. Mid-zones developed on cores show a sharp decrease in Fo content (~Fo90.9) across irregular, convoluted, and embayed contacts indicating disequilibrium and partial dissolution of the olivine xenocrysts combined with diffusion-driven replacement. Magmatically crystallized olivine rims can jacket xenocrystic cores and mid-zones. Rims have uniform and distinctive chemical compositions of ~Fo91.8 ± 0.7 (2σ) and NiO concentrations that decrease (~0.4 wt% to ~0.1 wt%) outward. Rinds, thin outer fringes, have a convoluted inner contact and a sawtooth contact with the groundmass. Rind compositions have high ~Fo97.1, low NiO, and elevated Mn and Ca. Rind textural relationships and compositions suggest a non-magmatic, post-emplacement origin. The four olivine populations and chemical zonation (only cores, mid-zones, and rims) are uniformly and consistently distributed throughout the Leslie kimberlite. Thus, olivine within a single phase of kimberlite predominantly records pre-emplacement processes and illustrates that magma batches become well mixed during ascent and emplacement. In contrast, both late-stage high-Mg rinds and monticellite coronas are non-uniformly distributed throughout the pipe. Utilizing olivine geochemistry, coupled with petrographic observations, we reconstruct a sequence of events of the Leslie kimberlite ascent and eruption. Our results indicate olivine entrainment and ascent (within a single kimberlite phase) may be sufficiently characterized by a few samples. Conversely, syn- and post-emplacement processes recorded by olivine require systematic sampling to capture all potential heterogeneities within a given kimberlite phase.
OLIVINE DIVERSITY IN THE LESLIE KIMBERLITE, NT, CANADA: IMPLICATIONS FOR TRANSPORT AND EMPLACEMENT PROCESSES by Katherine Landoni B.Sc. Honors, Oregon State University, 2019 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Geological Sciences) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) April 2022 © Katherine Landoni, 2022 ii The following individuals certify that they have read, and recommend to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies for acceptance, a thesis entitled: OLIVINE DIVERSITY IN THE LESLIE KIMBERLITE, NT, CANADA: IMPLICATIONS FOR TRANSPORT AND EMPLACEMENT PROCESSES Submitted by Katherine Grace Landoni in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geological Sciences. Examining Committee James K. Russell, Professor, Department of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, UBC Supervisor Maya Kopylova, Professor, Department of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, UBC Supervisory Committee Member Barbara Scott Smith, Adjunct Professor, Department of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, UBC Supervisory Committee Member Lucy Porritt, Lecturer and Research Associate, Department of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, UBC Additional Examiner iii Abstract Olivine crystals are ubiquitous in kimberlites and record petrologic events through all stages of ascent and eruption. Well-preserved olivine from the Leslie kimberlite, NT, Canada elucidates the sequence of events attending kimberlite emplacement. The Leslie kimberlite mainly hosts a single phase of extrusive coherent kimberlite. We used spatially distributed samples (n = 76) from drill core to develop a 3D representation of the Leslie kimberlite. Petrographic investigation defined four distinct olivine populations: phenocrysts, macrocrysts, dunite “nodules”, and mantle xenolith-hosted olivine. SEM imagery, and major and trace element geochemistry were used to characterize and quantify chemical zonation including xenocrystic cores, mid-zones, magmatically crystallized rims, high-Mg rinds, and/or monticellite coronas. Core compositions (Fo85.7 to Fo93.8, NiO ~0.36 wt%) and other textural evidence show that cores are mantle-derived olivine xenocrysts. Mid-zones developed on cores show a sharp decrease in Fo content (~Fo90.9) across irregular, convoluted, and embayed contacts indicating disequilibrium and partial dissolution of the olivine xenocrysts combined with diffusion-driven replacement. Magmatically crystallized olivine rims can jacket xenocrystic cores and mid-zones. Rims have uniform and distinctive chemical compositions of ~Fo91.8 ± 0.7 (2σ) and NiO concentrations that decrease (~0.4 wt% to ~0.1 wt%) outward. Rinds, thin outer fringes, have a convoluted inner contact and a sawtooth contact with the groundmass. Rind compositions have high ~Fo97.1, low NiO, and elevated Mn and Ca. Rind textural relationships and compositions suggest a non-magmatic, post-emplacement origin. The four olivine populations and chemical zonation (only cores, mid-zones, and rims) are uniformly and consistently distributed throughout the Leslie kimberlite. Thus, olivine within a iv single phase of kimberlite predominantly records pre-emplacement processes and illustrates that magma batches become well mixed during ascent and emplacement. In contrast, both late-stage high-Mg rinds and monticellite coronas are non-uniformly distributed throughout the pipe. Utilizing olivine geochemistry, coupled with petrographic observations, we reconstruct a sequence of events of the Leslie kimberlite ascent and eruption. Our results indicate olivine entrainment and ascent (within a single kimberlite phase) may be sufficiently characterized by a few samples. Conversely, syn- and post-emplacement processes recorded by olivine require systematic sampling to capture all potential heterogeneities within a given kimberlite phase. v Lay Summary Kimberlite magmas are generated in the mantle and are thought to rise to Earth’s surface rapidly, entraining mantle material on route. They erupt at the surface forming kimberlite volcanoes and they are mined as the primary source of diamonds. Mantle material entrained in kimberlite magma is dominated by olivine. Olivine records dynamic physical and chemical processes occurring within the kimberlite magma during its rapid journey to the surface and during the eruption at the surface. The Leslie kimberlite, Canada has well-preserved olivine throughout the pipe, from which we investigate the importance of robust spatial sampling for olivine studies. We found that all olivine reflected the same processes that occurred prior to eruption. However, processes that occurred during/after eruption unevenly modify olivine. This means sampling to understand eruptive and alteration processes needs to be more thorough than sampling to understand kimberlite ascent processes. vi Preface This thesis is original, unpublished work by Katherine Landoni. The sampling selection was done jointly by Dr. Barbara Scott Smith and me. The Leslie Pipe was originally drilled by BHP Billiton Diamonds Inc. who subsequently distributed full drill cores and samples to various research and teaching institutions in Canada and South Africa. Drill core samples and thin sections from Leslie were provided by Dr. Scott Smith (Scott-Smith Petrology Inc.) via Dr. Yana Fedortchouck (Dalhousie University) and Dr. Jarek Jakubec (SRK Consulting) as well as by Barrett Elliott (Northwest Territories Geological Survey), Prof. Graham Pearson and Prof. Thomas Stachel (University of Alberta), and Dr. Philip Janney from the John J. Gurney Upper Mantle Research Collection (University of Cape Town). Barrett Elliott also provided photos of full Leslie kimberlite drill cores (LDC-01 and LDC-04). Dr. Tom Nowicki (Mineral Services Canada) and Jon Carlson (Arctic Canadian Diamond Company Ltd.) provided detailed information about the Leslie kimberlite as well as the Ekati Diamond Mine and specifically provided the map in Figure 2, which I later adapted. Many people helped me during the worldwide sample selection process. Colleen Laroulondie and Isabelle Lepine of Stornoway Diamond Corporation facilitated evaluation of the Renard Mine (Ontario) project database and samples for fresh olivine. Prof Maya Kopylova and Prof J. Kelly Russell provided access to the Renard kimberlite drill core as well as other samples housed at the University of British Columbia. Dr. Barbara Scott Smith provided access to, and assisted with, the evaluation of the worldwide Scott-Smith Petrology Inc. drillcore and sample collection. Casey Hetman and Jock Robey helped the early sample selection process from some African localities. vii Samples were imaged by me and Stuart Smith (SRK Consulting). Samples were thin sectioned by Precision Petrographics Inc.. Petrographic analysis was conducted by me with significant kimberlite petrographic training and help from Dr. Scott Smith at Scott Smith Petrology Inc.. Scanning Electron Microscope imagery and Electron Microprobe Analyses were undertaken by me with help from Jacob Kabel and Edith Czech, respectively, at the University of British Columbia. I analyzed the data with help from Prof. J. Kelly Russell. Prof. Russell and I interpreted data and observations. I wrote this thesis with revisions and edits from Prof. Russell, Dr. Lucy Porritt, Prof. Maya Kopylova, and Dr. Barbara Scott Smith. Prof. Russell and Dr. Scott Smith helped guide the trajectory of my research and put me in contact with the companies, organizations, and people involved the initial sampling process and the sampling of the Leslie kimberlite. Prof. Maya Kopylova provided feedback and advice during committee meetings. viii Table of Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... iii Lay Summary .................................................................................................................................. v Preface .......................................................................................................................................... vi Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………viii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. xi List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xii Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................ xiv 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 2. Sample Collection from Archives ........................................................................................... 4 3. The Leslie Kimberlite Pipe, NT, Canada .................................................................................. 8 3.1. The Leslie Kimberlite Sample Suite ................................................................................ 8 3.2. Geologic Context .......................................................................................................... 12 3.2.1. Evidence Leslie is a Sensu Stricto Kimberlite .............................................................. 15 3.2.2. Phases of Kimberlite in the Leslie Kimberlite ............................................................. 15 3.2.3. Emplacement of the Leslie Kimberlite ....................................................................... 18 3.3. Previous Studies of Olivine in The Leslie Kimberlite ..................................................... 22 4. Methods ............................................................................................................................... 24 4.1. Petrographic Methods ................................................................................................. 24 4.2. Scanning Electron Microprobe Methods ...................................................................... 24 4.3. Electron Microprobe Analysis ...................................................................................... 24 ix 5. Review of Kimberlite Olivine Populations ............................................................................ 27 5.1. Macrocrysts .............................................................................................................. 27 5.2. Phenocrysts .............................................................................................................. 28 5.3. Nodules .................................................................................................................... 29 5.4. Mantle-Xenolith Hosted Olivine ............................................................................... 30 5.5. Summary .................................................................................................................. 30 6. Review of Chemical Zones in Kimberlitic Olivine ................................................................. 33 6.1. Cores ........................................................................................................................ 33 6.2. Rims .......................................................................................................................... 34 6.3. Internal Zones .......................................................................................................... 35 6.4. High-Mg Rinds .......................................................................................................... 38 7. Olivine Populations in The Leslie Kimberlite ........................................................................ 40 7.1. Phenocrysts .............................................................................................................. 40 7.2. Macrocrysts .............................................................................................................. 40 7.3. Mantle-Xenolith Hosted Olivine ............................................................................... 43 7.4. Dunite Nodules ......................................................................................................... 43 7.5. Summary of Olivine Populations .................................................................................. 45 8. Zonation of Olivine Populations in Leslie ................................................................................. 47 8.1. Cores ........................................................................................................................ 47 8.2. Mid-Zones ................................................................................................................ 48 8.3. Rims ......................................................................................................................... 48 8.4. Rinds ........................................................................................................................ 49 9. Other Olivine Features ......................................................................................................... 51 9.1. Rounded Olivine ....................................................................................................... 51 9.2. Broken Olivine .......................................................................................................... 52 9.3. Monticellite Coronas on Olivine ............................................................................... 53 x 9.4. Summary of Leslie Olivine Textures ......................................................................... 56 10. Major and Minor Elements in Olivine ............................................................................. 58 10.1. Cores ............................................................................................................................ 62 10.2. Mid-Zone ...................................................................................................................... 62 10.3. Rims .............................................................................................................................. 63 10.4. Rinds ............................................................................................................................. 63 10.5. T-tests ........................................................................................................................... 69 10.6. Monticellite .................................................................................................................. 72 11. Discussion ......................................................................................................................... 74 11.1. Homogeneity of Pre-Emplacement Olivine .................................................................. 72 11.2. Heterogeneity of Post-Emplacement Olivine. .............................................................. 80 12. Conclusions and Sampling Suggestions ............................................................................ 85 References ................................................................................................................................... 89 Appendix A: Full drill core photographs (LDC-01 and LDC-04) ..................................................... 96 Appendix B: Hand sample and slab photographs ...................................................................... 113 Appendix C: Petrography ........................................................................................................... 122 Appendix D: Electron Microprobe Data ..................................................................................... 145 xi List of Tables Table 1: Kimberlite Sample Suite Short-List ................................................................................... 7 Table 2: Leslie Sample Suite ......................................................................................................... 10 Table 3: EMPA Spectrometer Arrangement and Standards ......................................................... 25 Table 4: Breakdown of EMPA Analyses ........................................................................................ 58 Table 5: Example Olivine EMPA Results for LDC-01-226.94m A crystal 8 .................................... 59 Table 6: EMPA Olivine Summary Statistics ................................................................................... 64 Table 7: T-test Results Comparing Zones ..................................................................................... 69 Table 8: T-test Results Comparing Sample Cores ......................................................................... 70 Table 9: T-test Results Comparing Sample Rims .......................................................................... 71 Table 10: T-test Results Comparing Sample Rinds ....................................................................... 72 Table 11: EMPA Monticellite Results ........................................................................................... 73 xii List of Figures Figure 1: Leslie Kimberlite Plan and Cross-section View with Sample Locations ........................... 9 Figure 2: Location of Leslie in Ekati and Canada .......................................................................... 13 Figure 3: Hand sample images of chrome diopside throughout Leslie ........................................ 16 Figure 4: Thin section images of garnet throughout Leslie .......................................................... 17 Figure 5: Thin section images of volcaniclastic kimberlite in Leslie ............................................. 19 Figure 6: Hand sample images comparing extrusive and intrusive kimberlite ............................ 20 Figure 7: Leslie eruption and emplacement schematic ............................................................... 21 Figure 8: Summary figure of olivine populations and features in the literature .......................... 32 Figure 9: EMPA olivine results from Leslie from Bussweiler et al. (2015) .................................... 39 Figure 10: Images and schematic of Leslie phenocryst ................................................................ 41 Figure 11: Images and schematic of Leslie macrocryst ................................................................ 42 Figure 12: Images and schematic of Leslie mantle xenolith and nodule ...................................... 43 Figure 13: Olivine feature by population matrix .......................................................................... 46 Figure 14: Olivine high-Mg rind SEM images ............................................................................... 49 Figure 15: Olivine zone by population matrix .............................................................................. 50 Figure 16: Round olivine macrocryst and rim along internal crack SEM image ........................... 51 Figure 17: SEM images of broken olivine ..................................................................................... 52 Figure 18: Location of monticellite replacement in cross sectional view .................................... 54 xiii Figure 19: Images and schematic of monticellite coronas ........................................................... 55 Figure 20: BSE image of phenocryst and EMPA compositional line plots .................................... 60 Figure 21: BSE image of macrocryst and EMPA compositional line plots .................................... 61 Figure 22: Olivine EMPA results of Distance vs NiO wt% in LDC-01 rims ..................................... 64 Figure 23: Olivine EMPA results of Forsterite vs NiO wt% for all samples ................................... 65 Figure 24: Olivine EMPA results of Forsterite vs MnO wt% for all samples ................................. 66 Figure 25: Olivine EMPA results of Forsterite vs CaO wt% for all samples .................................. 67 Figure 26: Olivine EMPA results of Forsterite vs NiO wt% by population .................................... 68 Figure 27: Olivine phenocryst from de Maisonneuve et al. (2016) .............................................. 77 Figure 28: Events as recorded by kimberlite olivine from Leslie .................................................. 83 Figure 29: Schematic showing ascent and eruption of Leslie as recorded by olivine .................. 84 xiv Acknowledgments This research endeavor was supported by many people over the last 2+ years. First, I would like to thank Prof. James Kelly Russell, my MSc supervisor, for his support and encouragement during this research. He challenged me to be adaptable and creative with my research. His outside-of-the-box thinking inspired me to think about geology with a new, interesting, unique framework. Kelly managed to supervise me well despite the challenges due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Dr. Barbara Scott Smith guided me in my quest to understand complex kimberlite petrology and was eager to share what she learned through years of experience in industry and research. Barbara donated countless hours of her time to help me. I spent many days biking up to her home in North Vancouver to work on sample selection, to take her kimberlite course, to plan Vancouver Kimberlite Cluster (VKC) events, and to have in-depth conversations about kimberlites. Not only is Barbara a superb teacher and supervisor, but she is an incredibly caring person, an advocate, and a strong female role model for me. Anyone who has the privilege of working with Barbara is fortunate. She exemplifies what it means to care about the people you work with. Finally, I taught lab courses for Prof. Maya Kopylova and Dr. Lucy Porritt, both helped me solidify my love for teaching. Thank you to Dr. Tom Nowicki and Jon Carlson for taking time out of their professional schedules to discuss my project with me and for providing details about Leslie and Ekati. Their genuine enthusiasm for my work was contagious. My access to Leslie kimberlite information was granted by Rory Moore (President and CEO of Arctic Canadian Diamond Company Ltd.). I benefitted from technical discussions with Dr. Herman Grutter (SRK Consulting). Jock and Jess Robey helped facilitate the shipping of Leslie kimberlite samples from University of Cape Town. xv This research was conducted as part of the Diamond Exploration and Research Training School (DERTS), a program funded by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) focused on bringing academics and industry professionals together to better train graduate students for geological industry jobs. The DERTS folks at UBC and UA were an engaging community. Prof. Graham Pearson, and Anetta Banas made this experience particularly rewarding. Thank you to everyone who participated in VKC events hosted by Barbara and me, it was really a blast to get to know industry professionals and academics in our community. My friends and VPL lab mates made my time at UBC a wholesome experience. Thank you to VPL lab mates Sophie Leiter, Martin Harris, Annie Borch, Mu Li, and Amy Ryan who helped guide me. Sophie Leiter, Martin Harris, Lindsey Abdale, Christina Draeger, James Nott, Steffen Lahrson, Sophie Arkell, and Dylan Cone were dear friends who always were up for an adventure, whether it was rock climbing, running, biking, skiing, hiking, cooking, or playing trivia. Lindsey’s dog, Sunny, has been a bright presence in our home. My friends back home in the USA, Nikki Frydenlund, Zöe Steine-Hanson, and Justine Feist were constant, virtual cheerleaders as I put roots down in Canada over the last few years. Those three friends are truly chosen family. My mom and dad have been unwavering in their support of everything I have ever done and have encouraged me to chase my passions, whatever they might be. My mom is a phenomenal writer and this written thesis would not have been possible without the writing foundations she taught me. I inherited my dad’s deep-seated, wonder and curiosity for science and our natural world, qualities that have propelled me through my science career. Together xvi they have modeled teaching, work-ethic, grace, resilience, and empathy; skills that proved to be invaluable during this period of my life. My brother, and best friend, is the kindest, most passionate person I know. He has supported me through both the rough and easy moments of life since day one. Although, geographically close, these three have had to support me from afar, in the USA. The COVID-19 pandemic has kept us apart longer than I had ever planned, and it has been challenging to not see them often in person over the past two years. Both of my Grandpa Joes were very proud of my scientific pursuits, and they wanted me to watch me succeed more than anything. Here’s to my family! This thesis is dedicated to them. 1 1. Introduction Kimberlites are volatile rich, ultra-basic magmas, originating from beneath the cratonic lithospheric at mantle depths >150 km (Bailey, 1980; Kopylova & Caro, 2004; MacKenzie & Canil, 1999). Kimberlites are the most deeply derived terrestrial magmas on Earth. Their rapid ascent from the base of the lithosphere to the surface of Earth can occur in less than a few days (Canil & Fedortchouk, 1999; Russell et al., 2012; Wilson et al., 2007), with ascent rates estimated to be 0.1 ms-1 to >4 ms-1 (Brett et al., 2015) or >4 ms-1 to 20 ms-1 (Sparks et al., 2006). Kimberlite magmas have low viscosities of 0.1 to 1 Pa s (Sparks et al., 2006), and yet they entrain and transport dense xenoliths during transit through the lithosphere. Entrained mantle xenoliths can contain diamonds and kimberlites can transport diamonds and deposit them at Earth’s surface. Economically viable diamondiferous kimberlites are often mined. Among the material transported by kimberlites, olivine is the most abundant mineral and typically has a ~50% modal abundance in hypabyssal kimberlites (HK) worldwide (Scott Smith, 2008). Olivine has at least two origins. Most olivine is from entrained and disaggregated mantle xenoliths while some olivine is magmatically crystallized from the kimberlite melt (Arndt et al., 2010; Brett et al., 2009; Bussweiler et al., 2015; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004; Howarth & Taylor, 2016; Kamenetsky et al., 2008). Olivine records the entire kimberlite’s history from starting the mantle, through ascent, and ending after emplacement. Thus, olivine is an invaluable petrogenetic recorder of kimberlite processes. Fresh olivine in kimberlite is rare and poorly preserved because of pervasive deuteric and/or external water alteration primarily resulting in replacement by serpentine (Afanasyev et al., 2014; Cas et al., 2008; Mitchell, 2013; Porritt et al., 2012; Sparks et al., 2006). There are 2 numerous petrographic and geochemical studies of fresh olivine in kimberlites, although most are based on few samples from a given pipe (Arndt et al., 2010; Bussweiler et al., 2015; Cordier et al., 2015; Howarth & Taylor, 2016) that lack geological context (Abersteiner et al., 2020; Kamenetsky et al., 2008). Kimberlite pipes commonly comprise a variety of lithofacies or kimberlite phases (i.e., magma batches deriving from the mantle). Different phases may carry a different mantle load and diamonds, which may further be broken, diluted, or concentrated by different eruption processes. Therefore, understanding these phases and their distribution in a kimberlite is important for kimberlite petrology, volcanology, and diamond exploration. It begs the question; are olivine populations evenly representative throughout a kimberlite pipe such that a single sample captures the diversity of olivine populations and features? The Leslie kimberlite provides a superb opportunity to study fresh olivine throughout the entirety of the pipe because of its remarkably consistent fresh olivine, observed in this study. It is a single kimberlite phase with well distributed drill holes, and preserved drill core (Berg & Carlson, 1998; Bussweiler et al., 2015; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004; Webb et al., 2008). Access to the Leslie kimberlite provided by Scott-Smith Petrology Inc (SSPI), Northwest Territories Geological Survey (NTGS), University of Cape Town (UCT), and University of Alberta (UA) enabled this study to investigate the following questions: 1. How many distinguishable olivine populations are in Leslie based on characteristic properties including morphology, size, chemical zonation, structure, etc. 2. Are olivine populations homogenous throughout kimberlite phases? If heterogenous, how are they organized and why? 3 3. What are the origins of each population? Can a single transport, ascent, emplacement, and post-emplacement model explain the distinct properties? 4. Are Leslie olivine populations representative of kimberlites olivine populations worldwide? Here we collect a sample suite (Table 1) of fresh olivine spatially covering the full width and depth of the Leslie kimberlite pipe. We present petrographic characterization, scanning electron microscope characterization, and electron microprobe analysis data. These data inform on pipe-scale diversity, heterogeneity of olivine populations, olivine crystallization, olivine modification, and kimberlite emplacement conditions. Our results identify at least four olivine populations in Leslie: i) mantle xenolith-hosted olivine (e.g., Menzies et al., 2004), ii) “nodules” (e.g., Arndt et al., 2006, 2010), iii) macrocrysts (e.g., Clement, 1982), and iv) phenocrysts (e.g., Brett et al., 2009). Olivine properties related to pre-emplacement processes are homogenous throughout the pipe, whereas olivine properties related to syn- and post-emplacement processes recorded by olivine are heterogeneously distributed throughout the pipe. 4 2. Sample Collection from Archives For a true comparison of olivine in kimberlites worldwide, ideally, a study should include samples with the following intra- (I)- (IV) and inter- (V)-(VII) pipe criteria: Intra-pipe criteria: (I) Unaltered (“fresh”) enough olivine for analysis where olivine margins are fresh. (II) Samples should come from sensu stricto kimberlites. (III) Samples should come from kimberlites where geologic context is known or established. (IV) Samples ideally should come from a kimberlite that has been sampled extensively resulting in a representative sample suite. Inter-pipe criteria: (V) Samples should come from (mined) kimberlites from a variety of cratons, worldwide. (VI) Samples should come from kimberlites with different emplacement styles. These dominantly include Kimberley-type pyroclastic kimberlite (KPK) and Fort à la Corne-type pyroclastic kimberlite (FPK) as defined by Scott Smith et al. (2018). (VII) Samples should ideally come from different cooling histories (i.e., slowly cooled hypabyssal kimberlite rocks vs. quickly cooled pyroclastic kimberlite rocks). My goal was to contribute a thoroughly sampled individual kimberlite that fits as many of the above criteria as possible. Significant effort went into selecting the ideal kimberlite. We found that the Leslie kimberlite meets criteria (I)- (IV) and is perfect for this study. Leslie was identified through an assessment of the large kimberlite collection at SSPI, with guidance from Dr. Barbara Scott Smith. Dr. Scott Smith’s kimberlites and “related rocks” collection includes 5 >5000 samples from worldwide kimberlites, including most major diamond mining localities. SSPI samples include drill core, hand samples, and thin sections. Dr. Scott Smith narrowed down the SSPI collection to only include samples with moderate-low olivine alteration from sensu stricto kimberlites through a query of the SSPI database. We further narrowed down the kimberlites/samples of interest through examination with a binocular microscope and polarizing microscope. Wesselton and Renard were the two KPK’s (Table 1) we identified as having moderately fresh olivine. This prompted further sample collection at Renard, a kimberlite with locally archived samples. Samples from the Renard kimberlite were examined during visits to Stornoway in Port Moody, BC in generous cooperation with Colleen Laroulandie (P.Geo) with assistance from Dr. Scott Smith. While at Stornoway, thin sections of samples with fresh olivine were targeted and assessed for their suitability for this study. Stornoway queried their extensive and detailed database of representative samples collected from kimberlite bodies at Renard to aid in assessment of suitability for this study. Stornoway’s database is based on ~1400 drill cores with a total of 11,230 downhole representative samples of Renard kimberlite bodies, dykes, and other surrounding targets. There are an additional ~150 representative rock samples from underground drifts, surface trenches, and float. 2135 samples and slabs, and 3939 individual thin sections were used for petrographic examinations during the development of 3D geological models by Stornoway for resource evaluation. The database curated by Stornoway includes sample type, sample 3D location, sample attribute assessments, and kimberlite unit descriptions and assignments. Sample attributes include textural classifications and olivine descriptions that describe olivine grain size, olivine 6 genetic classification, and degree and type of replacement. The filters applied to this database for sample selection were (I) the degree of olivine replacement and (II) textural classification: hypabyssal kimberlite, magmatic kimberlite, and coherent kimberlite. This query resulted in 6.6% of the samples from the database recorded to have >20% fresh olivine in thin section and are primarily from Renard 2 and Renard 3, with one sample from Renard 1. These samples were then evaluated for their suitability for investigation relative to other fresh olivine samples identified at SSPI. Even the freshest olivine from Renard samples have moderately altered olivine by the standards used in this study and olivine margins are not often preserved. Through sample evaluation and selection at SSPI and Stornoway, we found that KPKs tend to poorly preserve olivine relative to FPKs. Thus, we decided that olivine in KPK systems are not consistently fresh enough throughout a pipe for use in this study and thus, Renard and Wesselton were removed from consideration. No additional Wesselton samples outside of SSPI had been collected at the time of its discontinuation. FPKs in this assessment of SSPI samples included Panda, Darkwing, Diavik, and Leslie (Table 1). Through evaluation of these localities using the criteria listed above, we found that Leslie was well suited for this study as it met many of the intra-pipe criteria. Because of its consistently fresh olivine, simple internal geology, and high prospects of obtaining additional samples from various sources. Thus, we pursued fresh olivine samples distributed throughout the Leslie kimberlite for this study. Sample selection processes at Leslie are described in Section 3.1. 7 Table 1: Short-list of viable kimberlites for olivine study identified at SSPI and UBC. Details include the kimberlite name, county of origin, craton of origin, type of kimberlite, and justification for why the kimberlite belongs on the short-list. HK= Hypabyssal kimberlite. FPK= Fort à la Corne-type pyroclastic kimberlite, where a pFPK is a probable FPK. CK=coherent kimberlite Kimberlite Country Craton Type of Kimberlite Evaluated for Fresh Olivine Justification Wesselton South Africa Kaapvaal HK HK has moderately fresh olivine and was slowly cooled. Wesseleton is mined and from Kimberley, South Africa (the type-area). Renard Canada Superior HK HK has moderately fresh olivine and was slowly cooled. Renard is mined, is on the Superior Craton, and extensive known geologic context. Panda Canada Slave FPK FPK has melt-bearing pyroclasts and pyrocrysts that have fresh olivine in the melt selvages and FPK was rapidly cooled. Panda is mined. Darkwing Canada Slave CK Superbly fresh olivine in CK, little geologic context is known, and only two drill holes exist. Leslie Canada Slave FPK and CK Consistently fresh olivine throughout the coherent kimberlite and access to more drill core. Fine-grained groundmass suggests a quick cooling history of CK. Diavik (A154N) Canada Slave CK Superbly fresh olivine and mined. Diavik CK samples derive from dikes. 8 3. The Leslie Kimberlite Pipe, NT, Canada 3.1. The Leslie Kimberlite Sample Suite Our goal is to petrographically and geochemically characterize olivine diversity within the Leslie kimberlite. To achieve this, we assembled 76 Leslie samples (Table 2) from six drill cores ranging in depths from 18m to 445m (Figure 1). Drill cores intersect the host country rock and therefore represent the full extent of the Leslie body to depths <~400m, not including the at center that is not drilled (Figure 1). The following six drill holes were assembled for this sample suite: LC-1, LDC-01, LDC-03, LDC-04, LDC-07, and LDC-09 (Table 2). Drill core samples and thin sections in Dr. Barbara Scott Smith’s collection at Scott Smith Petrologic Inc. (SSPI) are from holes LDC-07 and LDC-09. These samples were examined with a binocular microscope and a polarizing microscope to evaluate for olivine alteration (low/no alteration = “fresh”). The collections at SSPI allowed me to compare olivine in thin sections to their respective hand specimens. This provided a unique opportunity to learn how to recognize very fresh olivine within hand specimens. Samples with fresh enough olivine from LDC-07 and LDC-09 were identified using a binocular microscope. These samples were further refined to preferentially only include samples that vary in depth (i.e., a shallow, mid-depth, and a deep sample) and space. Selected samples for use in this study were cut for thin sections and polished thin sections. See Table 2 for a complete list of hand samples, thin sections, and polished thin sections from LDC-07 and LDC-09. Additional hand samples, thin sections, and polished thin sections from LDC-03, LDC-01, LDC-07, and LC-1 are primarily from the John Gurney collection (JJG samples) at the University of Cape Town (UCT) and were sent by Prof. Philip Janney. Additional JJG hand samples, on loan 9 to the University of Alberta, were sent by Prof. Graham Pearson. JJG and UCT samples were evaluated, and polished thin sections were cut from samples with fresh olivine. See Table 2 for a complete list of hand samples, thin sections, and polished thin sections of JJG and UCT samples. Figure 1: Pipe model originally Dominion Diamond Corporation and adapted for this study. Leslie kimberlite sample locations of hand samples (white filled circles), thin sections (grey filled circles), and polished thin sections (black filled circles). (A) Plan-view. (B) North-south cross section showing samples from LDC-01, LDC-03, and LDC-09. (C) East-west cross section showing samples from LC-1, LDC-04, and LDC-07. See Table 2 for a complete list of hand samples, thin sections, and polished thin sections. 10 Images of Leslie drill core from LDC-04 and LDC-01 (Appendix A and B), currently housed at Northwest Territories Geological Survey (NTGS), were sent by Barrett Elliott for evaluation of olivine freshness and sampling. Samples were chosen from these images at semi-regular depth intervals with a preference to drill core that appeared fresh and uncontaminated by crustal xenoliths. Requested drill core samples were sent by Barrett Elliott. Drill core hand samples from LDC-01 and LCD-04 were cut in half, lengthwise for polished slabs for this study and unpolished slabs for return NTGS archive. Hand samples were further evaluated under a binocular microscope and fresh samples were selected for thin sectioning with preference to samples that vary in both depth and space. See Table 2 for a complete list of hand samples, thin sections, and polished thin sections from LDC-01 and LDC-04. Table 2 The Leslie sample suite for this study including drill hole label, sample depth, and assigned sample ID. Columns 4-6 indicate the number of hand samples (HS), slabs, thin sections (TS), and/or polished thin sections (PTS). Sample source indicates where the sample was obtained in this study, including Prof. Philip Janney from The University of Cape Town (UCT), Barrett Elliott from Northwest Territories Geological Survey (NTGS), Prof. Graham Pearson from University of Alberta (UA), and Dr. Barbara Scott Smith from Scott-Smith Petrology Inc. (SSPI). See Figure 1 for these samples in plan-view and cross-sectional view in Leslie. Drill hole Sample Depth in Hole Sample ID HS Slab TS PTS Sample Source LC-1 38 JJG-5023 1+ UCT LDC-01 23.00 LDC-01-22.6m 2 NTGS LDC-01 35.72 LDC-01-35.7m 1 NTGS LDC-01 47.60 LDC-01-47.8m 1 NTGS LDC-01 68.05 LDC-01-67.7m 1 NTGS LDC-01 72.52 LDC-01-70.5m 1 NTGS LDC-01 74.25 JJG-5012 1 1 UCT LDC-01 89.67 LDC-01-90m 2 NTGS LDC-01 92.8 JJG-5043 UA LDC-01 98.06 LDC-01-98m 1 NTGS LDC-01 115.88 LDC-01-115.7m 1 NTGS LDC-01 130.87 LDC-01-130.8m 1 NTGS LDC-01 140.79 LDC-01-140.79m 1 1 2 NTGS LDC-01 182.74 LDC-01-180m 1 NTGS 11 LDC-01 194.7 JJG-5019 1 UCT LDC-01 211.50 LDC-01-211.5m 1 NTGS LDC-01 226.94 LDC-01-226.94m 1 1 2 NTGS LDC-01 235.91 LDC-01-235m 1 NTGS LDC-01 255.88 LDC-01-250m 1 NTGS LDC-01 265.22 LDC-01-265m 1 NTGS LDC-03 25 JJG-5016 1 UCT LDC-03 35 JJG-5015 2 UCT LDC-03 39 JJG-5014 3 UA, UCT LDC-03 160 LDC-03-160m 1 UCT LDC-03 270 JJG-5017 1 1 2 UCT LDC-03 330 JJG-5018 half 1 UCT LDC-03 404 JJG-5020 half+ UA, UCT LDC-03 445 LDC-03-445m 1 UCT LDC-04 36.24 LDC-04-36.24m 1 NTGS LDC-04 57.10 LDC-04-57.10m 1 NTGS LDC-04 89.40 LDC-04-89.40m 1 NTGS LDC-04 108.19 LDC-04-108.19m 1 NTGS LDC-04 111.17 LDC-04-111.17m 2 1 2 NTGS LDC-04 138.61 LDC-04-138.61m 1 NTGS LDC-04 161.89 LDC-04-161.89m 1 NTGS LDC-04 176.67 LDC-04-176.67m 1 NTGS LDC-04 189.50 LDC-04-189.50m 1 NTGS LDC-04 192.82 LDC-04-192.82m 1 1 2 NTGS LDC-04 214.13 LDC-04-214.13m 1 NTGS LDC-04 228.3 LDC-04-228.3m 1 NTGS LDC-04 251.93 LDC-04-251.93m 1 NTGS LDC-04 285.71 LDC-04-285.71m 1 1 2 NTGS LDC-04 307.04 LDC-04-307.04m 1 NTGS LDC-07 20 JJG-5028 1 UA LDC-07 26.1 LDC-07-26.1m whole SSPI LDC-07 34 JJG-5043 1 UA LDC-07 41.6 LDC-07-41.6m whole SSPI LDC-07 52.3 LDC-07-52.3m half 1 1 2 SSPI LDC-07 70.1 LDC-07-70.1m half 1 2 SSPI LDC-07 106 LDC-07-106m whole SSPI LDC-07 116.8 LDC-07-116.8m whole SSPI LDC-07 128.8 LDC-07-128.8m whole SSPI LDC-07 141 LDC-07-141m whole SSPI LDC-07 151.3 LDC-07-151.3m half 1 2 SSPI LDC-07 157.8 LDC-07-157.8m whole SSPI LDC-07 172.6 LDC-07-172.6m whole SSPI LDC-07 192 LDC-07-192m whole SSPI LDC-07 212.6 LDC-07-212.6m whole SSPI 12 LDC-07 215.8 LDC-07-215.8m whole SSPI LDC-07 222.5 JJG-5040 1 UA LDC-07 224.5 LDC-07-224.5m whole SSPI LDC-07 234 LDC-07-234m half 1 2 1 SSPI LDC-07 258 LDC-07-258m whole SSPI LDC-07 269.8 LDC-07-269.8m whole SSPI LDC-07 293.8 LDC-07-293.8m whole SSPI LDC-07 304.9 LDC-07-304.9m half 1 2 2 SSPI LDC-09 18.3 LDC-09-18.3m whole SSPI LDC-09 40.2 LDC-09-40.2m split SSPI LDC-09 68.2 LDC-09-68.2m split 1 2 SSPI LDC-09 89.9 LDC-09-89.9m split 1 2 SSPI LDC-09 112.2 LDC-09-112.2m split SSPI LDC-09 145.6 LDC-09-145.6m whole SSPI LDC-09 168.8 LDC-09-168.8m half 1 1 2 SSPI LDC-09 189.5 LDC-09-189.5m whole SSPI LDC-09 209.9 LDC-09-209.9m whole SSPI LDC-09 234.12 LDC-09-234.12m half 1 1 2 SSPI Total Samples 76 39 39 17 17 3.2. Geologic Context The Leslie kimberlite is a 7 hectare kimberlite pipe (Berg & Carlson, 1998) located on the Ekati property of the Lac de Gras region in the Northwest Territories of Canada (Figure 2). The Lac de Gras region is situated on the Slave Craton, an Archean terrain of granite and greenstone. The Ekati property country rocks are plutonic granitoids with ages ranging from 2.64 to 2.58 Ga (van Breemen et al., 1992). Although no Phanerozoic rocks exist on the modern-day surface of the Lac de Gras province, late-Cretaceous to early-Tertiary sediments were present at the time of kimberlite eruptions in the Lac de Gras region (Nowicki et al., 2004). Xenoliths of shale containing fossils have been recovered from Lac de Gras kimberlites and provide evidence of a sedimentary cover at the time of emplacement. Palynological studies suggest the age of the sedimentary cover ranges from the late-Albian to early-Eocene with sedimentary burial depths of >1100 m and < ~200 m respectively (Stasiuk et al., 2003). 13 Erosion from the time of emplacement at 53.1 +/- 0.7 Ma (Sakar et al., 2015) to the present-day surface is estimated to not be more than a few hundred meters (Berg & Carlson, 1998; Nowicki et al., 2004). During the Quaternary, the Lac de Gras region has been glaciated numerous times causing both glacial erosion and glacial till deposition (Dredge et al., 1999). The Leslie kimberlite lies directly beneath one of the many lakes on the Ekati property where Figure 2: The Ekati Property and its location in Canada (insert). All known kimberlites on the Ekati property are labeled with white diamonds. Current or past mines are labeled with a dark circle. The Leslie kimberlite is labeled with a black diamond. 14 lacustrine sediments are now deposited (Nowicki et al., 2004). Finally, Leslie was discovered in 1992 and a total of 12 drill holes and 12 reverse circulation (RC) holes were drilled by BHP Billiton. Drill cores were subsequently sent to various organizations and institutions for research. Berg & Carlson, 1998 found that the Leslie kimberlite dominantly comprises a single body of coherent, fresh, macrocrystic, monticellite-rich kimberlite (Figure 1). They report the coherent kimberlite (CK) body overlies a heavily altered volcaniclastic kimberlite (VK) deposit. The VK unit is determined based on a single intersection of volcaniclastic rock at a vertical depth of ~400m at the bottom of drill hole LDC-03. Berg and Carlson (1998) envisaged that the Leslie kimberlite eruption began as a pipe-forming explosive eruption that was subsequently infilled by the CK either through the filling of the excavated open vent or by a hypabyssal intrusion into a pipe filled with VK. In this study, we present petrographic and textural supporting evidence that (i) Leslie is a sensu stricto kimberlite, (ii) Leslie CK is dominantly a single phase of kimberlite, and (iii) the Leslie Kimberlite was emplaced as a pipe-forming, excavating volcanic eruption that was later filled by an extrusive coherent kimberlite (ECK). Our samples represent predominantly one phase of ECK (~95% of samples), a small number of possible additional ECK phases (~5% of samples), and one sample of VK. Images of drill core boxes, images of hand specimens/slabs, and petrographic descriptions can be found in Appendix A, B, and C. 15 3.2.1. Evidence Leslie is a Sensu Stricto Kimberlite Leslie is a sensu stricto kimberlite and fits the definition by Scott Smith et al. (2018). In the CK, olivine macrocrysts (olma) have a modal abundance of ~25% and range from very fine to ultra-coarse. Olma are round or anhedral, can have inclusions of garnet, chrome diopside, and opx, and can have deformation features. Macrocrysts of peridotitic garnet and chrome diopside, and peridotite mantle xenoliths are present throughout Leslie. Olivine phenocrysts (olph) in the CK have a modal abundance of ~25% ranging from very very fine to very fine, ranging from <0.5mm to 1 mm. Olph are subhedral to euhedral and do not show deformation features. The groundmass (~50% modal abundance) is composed of monticellite, phlogopite, spinel, lesser perovskite, patches of primary carbonate, primary serpentine, and apatite. There is no melilite or leucite observed. Additionally, Leslie is diamondiferous with an estimated average grade of 0.3ct/tonne based on bulk sampling of using twelve vertical reverse circulation drill holes representative of the dominant phase of coherent kimberlite investigated in this thesis (Scott Smith, public communication, 11 IKC, 2017; data courtesy of the Ekati Diamond Mine, Dominion Diamond Corporation). 3.2.2. Phases of Kimberlite in the Leslie Kimberlite The Leslie CK is dominated by a single phase of kimberlite (i.e., batch of mantle-derived magma). This phase has garnet peridotite xenoliths throughout and lacks eclogite mantle xenoliths. Chrome diopside (Figure 3) and garnet macrocrysts (Figure 4) have consistent abundance and size distribution throughout the phase. Garnets are typical peridoditic colors (burgundy or purple) and have brown reaction rims. Chrome diopsides have brown reaction 16 rims or potentially can further alter to a pale green. No ilmenite macrocrysts are observed. Olivine macrocrysts have a similar maximum size and range throughout. Overall, there is a low abundance of granitoid country rock xenoliths and there are no shale xenoliths. Possible additional CK phases exist at the near the country rock contact at the bottom of holes LDC-04(-307.04m), LDC-07(-269.8m, -293.8m, -304.9m), and LDC-09(-234.12m). These samples have fresher chrome diopside and garnet, have different proportions of olivine Figure 3: Representative chrome diopside with brown reaction rims throughout Leslie. (A, B) Drill core polished slab surfaces, (C) outer drill core surface, and (D) cracked drill core surface. 17 macrocrysts to groundmass and/or have different groundmass mineralogy/textures (see Appendix C for petrographic details of additional phases). The VK unit located at the bottom of LDC-03 contains shale xenoliths and melt-bearing pyroclasts (Figure 5) and is also likely a different phase of kimberlite than the main CK phase. If additional ECK phase(s) do exist at the lower pipe margin, they extruded prior to the main pipe-filling eruption and they were likely were excavated during pipe-forming explosive eruptions. There is currently not enough evidence to confidently conclude if these additional Figure 4: Plane polarized photomicrographs of garnet with a dark reaction rim in plane polarized light throughout all sampled Leslie drill holes and at various depths. Note abundant shards of broken olivine throughout theses samples. 18 phases represent earlier phases and how many distinct phases there may be. Additionally, it is important to note that little is known about the deeper parts of Leslie because drill holes were only drilled to depths of <~400m, however, it is probable that additional phases of kimberlite (both VK and CK) exist deeper in the pipe. 3.2.3. Emplacement of the Leslie Kimberlite The unit at the bottom LDC-03 at 445m is a volcaniclastic kimberlite because it has melt-bearing pyroclasts, broken olivine, and does not have a crystalline groundmass (Figure 5). Further, the VK is a likely Fort à la Corne-type pyroclastic kimberlite (FPK) as defined by Scott Smith et al. (2018) (B. Scott Smith, personal communications, 2021). The dominant “coherent kimberlite” (CK) body in Leslie is considered coherent because it has a continuously crystallized groundmass, country rock xenoliths are reacted, it lacks melt bearing pyroclasts or magmaclasts, and lacks pipe-scale olivine sorting. Further textural evidence indicates the Leslie CK is a pipe-fill extrusive coherent kimberlite (pfECK). Webb et al., 2008 highlight the difference between pfECKs and HKs in the Lac de Gras region and find that, texturally, pfCKs have locally heterogenous olivine distributions and a higher proportion of broken olivine macrocrysts than HKs. The Leslie CK has abundant broken olivine (Figure 4), local heterogenous olivine size distribution (Figure 3A), a low abundance of country rocks xenoliths (Figure 6), ultra- to super-fine groundmass, overall uniformity, olivine flow alignment (weak), and is olivine-rich (i.e., almost grain-supported). Additionally, the geometry of the body (i.e., a vacant pipe) and the spatial relationship of the CK overlying the VK unit indicate the Leslie CK is a pfECK. 19 The pfECK likely formed an extrusive lava lake in the volcanically excavated, vacant pipe (Figure 7). The volume of the lava lake can be estimated based on geometry of the current coherent body and erosion estimates for the Ekati area. Leslie lava lake volume calculations assume that the Leslie lava lake pipe has a consistent dip of 70° on all sides and that the lava lake tapers to a point, forming a simple cone. The lava lake has an estimated minimum volume of 2.3x107 m3, assuming no post-emplacement erosion and no continuation of the lava lake below the drilled depth. Assuming 200m of post-emplacement erosion and the lava lake Figure 5: Photomicrographs in plane polarized light of LDC-03-445m, volcaniclastic kimberlite. (A) Abundant broken olivine. (B) Probably shale xenolith moulded around olivine grains. (C) Probable shale xenolith mixed with kimberlite material (olivine phenocrysts). (D) Mantle micro-xenolith melt bearing pyroclasts. 20 continues as a cone at depth, the lava lake could have had a maximum volume of 5.6x107 m3. The true lava lake volume likely lies somewhere between the calculated maximum and minimum volumes. Leslie lava lake volume is comparable to the lava lakes at the Victor North Kimberlite Pipes, Canada. The volume of the Leslie lava lake is similar to the magma volume (4.34 x107 m3) of the lower Victor lava lake (DCK-L) and is larger than the magma volume of the upper Victor lava lake (4.1 x106 m3) (van Straaten, 2010). Figure 6: A polished slab of representative pfECK from the Leslie kimberlite (top). The Leslie pipe fill extrusive coherent kimberlite lacks abundant country rock xenoliths. Polished pucks of hypabyssal kimberlite from the Renard kimberlite (bottom) show abundant country rock xenoliths. 21 Figure 7: Eruption and emplacement model for the Leslie kimberlite. (A) Pipe-excavating volcanic eruption deposits volcaniclastic kimberlite in the pipe and on the paleo-surface. (B) Extrusive lava fills the open pipe to an unknown level. The present elevation is marked and <250m of erosion has occurred since emplacement. 22 The Leslie lava lake was rapidly cooled relative to hypabyssal kimberlites and has consistently unaltered olivine throughout. Most of the drilled coherent body is a single phase of kimberlite and thus, any heterogeneities found in this samples suite will represent true variation within a single phase, as opposed to heterogeneities resulting from differences between individual phases of kimberlites. 3.3. Previous Studies of Olivine in The Leslie Kimberlite Olivine and mantle xenoliths from the Leslie kimberlite have been previously studied by several groups (Bussweiler et al., 2015; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004; Menzies et al., 2004). Fedortchouk & Canil (2004) utilized olivine from Leslie, Aron, Grizzly, and Torrie kimberlites to constrain the oxygen fugacity and crystallization temperatures of Lac de Gras kimberlite magmas. Their sample suite from Leslie includes five samples from hole LDC-09 which show increasing serpentinization with depth. They found that Leslie olivine rims crystallized at ~1030°C at 1 GPa (or at lower pressures) as calculated by an olivine and chromite co-crystallization thermometer. Using the olivine-spinel barometer by Ballhaus et al. (1991) they calculated a “corrected” oxygen fugacity for the kimberlite magma. Correction of the olivine-spinel barometer is to account for undersaturation of orthopyroxene in the melt. Oxygen fugacity for the Leslie kimberlite is calculated to be between -2.87 ΔNNO and -2.47 ΔNNO (i.e., 2.87-2.47 log units less oxidized than the NNO buffer). Previous geochemical analyses of Leslie olivine (Bussweiler et al., 2015; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004) show similar results. Electron microprobe analyses by Fedortchouk & Canil (2004) found that olivine core compositions ranged Fo83.6 - Fo93.4 and NiO ranged 0.2 - 0.4%. Rims showed constant compositions of Fo91.3 - Fo91.9 and NiO contents of 0.1 - 0.4 wt%. Microprobe 23 and laser ablation analyses by Bussweiler et al. (2015) from one Leslie sample of an unspecified depth and drill hole showed similar results to Fedortchouk & Canil (2004). However, they found olivine core forsterite compositions to have a slightly higher, tighter compositional range (~Fo90 – ~Fo93) than previously reported by Fedortchouk & Canil (2004). Diversity of core compositions and textures was ascribed to the kimberlite sampling the lherzolitic and harzburgitic layers in the Slave craton lithosphere (Griffin et al., 1999; Menzies et al., 2004). Invariant forsterite composition and changes in NiO and CaO in the rim led Bussweiler et al. (2015) to conclude that olivine rims are the result of polybaric crystallization from a melt that is precipitating its dissolved silicate component during ascent. They calculated that magmatically crystallized olivine rims account for 19% by volume of the Leslie kimberlite, higher than the amount calculated (≤5 vol.%) by Brett et al. (2009) for Diavik, Lac de Gras. In the review paper by Giuliani (2018), he used geochemical Leslie olivine data collected by Bussweiler et al. (2015) and Fedortchouk & Canil (2004) to show that samples within a kimberlite have similar rim forsterite compositions. Additionally, he found kimberlites from the same cluster (i.e., six Lac de Gras kimberlites) tend to have similar rim forsterite compositions. Olivine rims from the Lac de Gras field tend to have higher forsterite compositions than those from Kimberley and other clusters. Tovey et al. (2021) used the same Leslie data, along with other major, minor, trace, and isotopic compositions from olivine rims and their chromite inclusions throughout Lac de Gras to show that Lac de Gras kimberlites derived from an evolving sub-lithospheric source. 24 4. Methods 4.1. Petrographic Methods Wedged thin sections and polished thin sections of samples were prepared at Precision Petrographics Ltd. Wedged kimberlite thin sections are 30 µm thick on one side of the slide thinning to the other side allowing for better observation of the groundmass minerals. Transmitted light images of thin sections and additional petrographic images can be found in Appendix A. The samples where olivine was deemed fresh enough for this study (Table 2) were petrographically examined and characterized in terms of olivine size, morphologies, visible zones, and textures. 4.2. Scanning Electron Microprobe Methods Thin sections were carbon coated and viewed using backscattered electron (BSE) imaging on a Philips XL30 electron microscope (SEM) at the Department of Earth Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. The SEM was operated at an accelerating voltage of 15 keV. It is equipped with a Bruker Quantax 200 energy-dispersion X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) microanalysis system that was used for spot characterization of relative elemental abundances. 4.3. Electron Microprobe Analysis Electron Microprobe Analysis (EMPA) of olivine was conducted to quantify major and minor element variability. Olivine grains were chosen for EMPA to represent the diversity of olivine in a sample. Fresh crystals were preferentially selected over serpentinized olivine. EMPA points were placed to avoid cracks, inclusions, or alteration. EMPA points were placed as transects across zones to measure finer scale changes and as individual analyses within a zone. 25 Microprobe analyses were measured on a fully automated CAMECA SX-50 electron microprobe at The Department of Earth Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. The EMPA at The University of British Columbia has four wavelength-dispersion X-ray spectrometers (WDS), three of which were utilized in this study (Table 3). The microprobe beam conditions were 15 kV accelerating voltage, 20nA primary electron beam current, with a beam diameter of 2 um. Preliminary analyses resulted in Al, P, and Cr consistently below detection limit, thus these elements were excluded from future analyses. Peak and background counting times respectively were: 20 s and 10 s for Mg, Fe (Fe is given as Fe2+), Si, 40 s and 20 s for Mn, and 60 s and 30s for Ni, Ti, Ca. Spectrometer arrangement and standards can of elements be found in Table 3. Table 3 Spectrometer arrangement and standards used for each element analyzed in olivine. Thallium Acid Phthalate (TAP) Lithium Fluoride (LIF) Pentaerythritol (PET) MgKa: olivine (s435) MnKa: synthetic rhodonite (s459) TiKa: rutile (S442) SiKa: olivine (s435) NiKa: synthetic Ni-olivine (s241) CaKa: diopside (S439) FeKa: olivine (s435) Data reduction followed the 'PAP' f(rZ) method (Pouchou & Pichoir, 1985) as part of the XMAS Reference Manual Version 13.0. The SAMx-SMAX software calculates the standard deviation of the sample analyses by taking the square root of the number of counts. Additionally, the software calculates detection limits and statistical detection threshold using off peak (i.e., background) counts. For a given point, the detection limit is calculated at one sigma above the background signal and the detection minimum is calculated at two sigma (2σ) above the background signal. Analyses are reported as “b.d.l.” (below detection limit) if the measured value was below the reported detection limit. Although data close to the detection 26 limit and minimum were still utilized in this study, we exercised caution interpreting values between one and six sigma above background counts. Mineral formulae were calculated for each olivine analysis with an assumed four oxygens and three cations. Cation totals were calculated assuming a balanced charge and that all cation sites are occupied. Analysis points with calculated cation totals differing by ≥0.05 from the expected three cations were excluded. Finally, forsterite (Fo) numbers were calculated as a mole % (100 × !"(!"$%&)) to represent the proportion of Mg found in the olivine analysis. 27 5. Review of Kimberlite Olivine Populations A brief summary of the literature on worldwide kimberlite olivine populations is presented below to establish a vocabulary for olivine used throughout this thesis. Numerous studies have established that there are two dominant olivine populations in kimberlites. These two populations are (1) large sub- to anhedral, round olivine crystals (Figure 8A) and (2) small sub- to euhedral olivine crystals (Figure 8B). Less common olivine populations include multi-crystalline dunite grains (Figure 8C) and mantle xenolith-hosted olivine (Figure 8D). 5.1. Macrocrysts Large (>1 mm) sub- to anhedral or round olivines are predominantly referred to as “macrocrysts” (Brett et al., 2009; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004; Kjarsgaard et al., 2010; Scott Smith et al., 2018). Alternatively, Clement (1982) and Bussweiler et al. (2015) define macrocrysts with smaller lower limits at >0.5mm and >0.1mm, respectively. Kamenetsky et al. (2008) refer to macrocrysts, including their broken counterparts as ‘Olivine I’ with a lower size limit of 0.5 mm. Arndt et al., (2006, 2010), and subsequently Cordier et al. (2015) refer to large, round macrocrysts interchangeably as “nodules” and macrocrysts, but prefer the term “monogranular nodules”. Macrocrysts were thought to be xenocrystic with mantle origins (Boyd & Clement, 1977; Clement, 1982). Overgrowths were identified on xenocrystic cores in macrocrysts (e.g., Figure 8A), (Arndt et al., 2010; Brett et al., 2009; Kamenetsky et al., 2008; 2009; Nielsen & Sand, 2008), shifting macrocryst origins toward both xenocrystic and cognate with the kimberlite melt. After magmatic overgrowths were first identified and documented, they were identified on xenocrystic olivine at kimberlites worldwide (Abersteiner et al., 2020; Brett et al., 2015; 28 Bussweiler et al., 2015; Giuliani et al., 2017; Hilchie et al., 2014; Howarth & Gross, 2019; Howarth & Taylor, 2016; Lim et al., 2018; Pilbeam et al., 2013; Soltys et al., 2018; Tovey et al., 2020, 2021). During ascent, macrocrysts also experience abrasion and attrition (Arndt et al., 2006, 2010; Boyd & Clement, 1977; Brett et al., 2015; Jones et al., 2014, 2019; Moss, 2009; Moss et al., 2010; Reid et al., 1975), likely responsible for their characteristic rounded morphology (e.g., Figure 8A). 5.2. Phenocrysts Small (<1 mm), euhedral to subhedral olivine crystals (Figure 8B) are referred to as “phenocrysts” (Brett et al., 2009; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004; Kjarsgaard et al., 2010; Scott Smith et al., 2018) or matrix olivine (Arndt et al., 2010). Clement (1982) first proposed a smaller upper size limit for phenocrysts of 0.5 mm. Kamenetsky et al. (2008) defines phenocrysts as “olivine-II” ranging from 0.05-0.8mm. Bussweiler et al. (2015) uses an even smaller upper limit for phenocrysts at 0.1mm. Phenocrysts of smaller sizes can be further referred to as micro-phenocrysts or microcrysts. In early kimberlite studies, olivine phenocrysts were thought to be cognate with kimberlite magma (Clement, 1982; Mitchell, 1973; A. E. Moore, 1988; R. O. Moore, 1986), some of which identify compositional olivine phenocrystic zoning (Boyd & Clement, 1977; Clement, 1982). Fedortchouk & Canil (2004) found that phenocrysts can have distinct cores with a rim that crystallized from the kimberlite melt. They draw parallels between phenocrystic cores and xenocrystic macrocrysts, but do not make conclusions regarding the origins of phenocryst cores. Subsequently, many of the same studies that identified olivine overgrowths on 29 macrocrysts also found that many phenocrysts have xenocrystic cores (e.g., Figure 8B) (Brett et al., 2009; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004; Kamenetsky et al., 2008). The term “phenocryst” used to describe small euhedral olivine in kimberlite is problematic because of its genetic connotation. Phenocryst implies the crystal was crystallized directly from the magma in which it is found at the surface. Due to the hybrid nature of phenocryst origins, kimberlite olivine phenocrysts do not fit the definition and genetic implications of the term “phenocryst”. 5.3. Nodules “Nodule” is a term used widely to describe mantle xenoliths. However, “nodule” was used by Arndt et al., 2006, 2010 to describe mono-mineralic, dunite grains that can be mono-crystalline or poly-crystalline (Figure 8C). Nodules are comprised of recrystallized, small, tablet-shaped crystals (“neoblasts”) and large anhedral olivine that have undulose extinction (Arndt et al., 2010). Neoblasts in nodules are often described as having a porphyroclastic, mosaic texture (Abersteiner et al., 2020; Arndt et al., 2010; Boyd & Clement, 1977; Cordier et al., 2015; Kamenetsky et al., 2008; A. E. Moore, 1988). These features are indicative of mantle strain deformation whereby olivine can statically recrystallize. These textures are commonly observed in deformed and porphyroclastic mantle peridotites (observed during sample selection at SSPI). Thus, nodules likely have mantle origins (Arndt et al., 2010) and can be considered micro-mantle xenoliths. Arndt et al. (2010) proposes a model of mantle “de-fertilization” to produce the nodules wherein all mantle phases, aside from olivine, are removed from the mantle peridotite. Contrastingly, Moore et al. (2020) argues that nodules, and their polycrystalline nature could be the product of deformation during kimberlite emplacement. 30 5.4. Mantle-Xenolith Hosted Olivine In addition to mono-mineralic dunite nodules (i.e., micro mantle-xenoliths), mantle peridotite and eclogite xenoliths are found in kimberlites (i.e., Menzies et al., 2004). Mantle peridotite xenoliths (Figure 8D) are coarse-grained aggregates of olivine, garnet, clinopyroxene, and/or orthopyroxene that have been entrained in the lithospheric mantle and rounded during ascent. It is generally accepted that olivine in these xenoliths are of mantle origin. Thus, if olivine phenocryst and macrocrystic cores are xenocrystic, mantle xenolith-hosted olivine can provide an insight into olivine chemistry, size, and texture prior to entrainment in the kimberlite. Anomalously large (>1 cm) olivine grains, or megacrysts, are an additional mantle olivine population. Olivine megacrysts and megacryst (e.g., garnet and chrome diopside) -hosted olivine inclusions are found in many kimberlites (i.e., Gurney et al., 1975; Howarth & Taylor, 2016; A. Moore & Costin, 2016; Nielsen & Sand, 2008). We do not investigate olivine megacrysts further. 5.5. Summary In this study, the terms “macrocryst” and “phenocryst” are used to categorize the two main olivine populations. Although we categorize olivine into these two discrete populations, it is notable that olivine grain sizes can lie anywhere on the gradation between macrocrysts and phenocryst mode sizes (Moss et al., 2010). Volumetrically, macrocrysts are dominated by a core, and phenocrysts are dominated by cognate overgrowth. Nodules and mantle xenolith-hosted olivine are found in lower abundances. All olivine populations described here can have 31 broken counterparts (i.e., Boyd & Clement, 1977; Brett et al., 2009; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004; Hayman & Cas, 2011; Hilchie et al., 2014; Kamenetsky et al., 2008; Moss, 2009; Nielsen & Sand, 2008; Scott Smith, 2008; van Straaten & Kopylova, 2013). In this study, I utilize the following vocabulary to petrographically identify olivine populations based on their size and morphology: 1. Phenocrysts: Sub- to euhedral olivine, generally <1 mm (Figure 8B). Importantly, this definition includes phenocrysts with xenocrystic cores. 2. Macrocrysts: Sub- to anhedral or round olivine, generally >1 mm (Figure 8A). 3. Nodules: Polycrystalline dunite grains. (Figure 8C). 4. Mantle Xenolith-Hosted Olivine: Olivine in coarse-grained multi-mineralic (e.g., garnet, clinopyroxene, orthopyroxene, etc.) mantle xenoliths (e.g., Figure 8D). 32 Figure 8: Summary of olivine populations (A)-(D) and zonation from previous studies(A), (B), (E)-(G). (A) An SEM BSE image of an olivine macrocrysts from Leslie, Canada with a core, rim, and a labelled chrome diopside inclusion (Bussweiler et al., 2015). (B) A plane polarized light photomicrograph of an olivine phenocryst from the Diavik, Canada with a round core and a euhedral rim (Brett et al., 2015). (C) A cross polarized light photo-micrograph of a nodule that comprises a large anhedral olivine (blue) and smaller olivine neoblasts from Mark, Canada (Abersteiner et al., 2020). (D) A macroscopic image of a mantle xenolith from Panada, Canada (Menzies et al., 2004). (E) A schematic of generalized olivine zones (core, internal zone 1 (i.z. 1), internal zone 2 (i.z. 2), rim, and rind) of olivine grain (Giuliani, 2018). (F) An SEM BSE image of an olivine phenocryst from the Udachnaya-East kimberlite, showing complex internal zones (Giuliani, 2018). (G) A SEM BSE image of an olivine macrocryst from Grizzly, Canada showing a core, simple internal zone, and rim (Lim et al., 2018). !"#!$#!%# !&#0.5 mm!'#!&#!(# !)# 33 6. Review of Chemical Zones in Kimberlitic Olivine Early studies of olivine from kimberlite occurrences worldwide show that olivine grains are often zoned (Boyd & Clement, 1977; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004; Mitchell, 1973; A. E. Moore, 1988). The chemical zones are categorized as olivine are cores, internal/transitional zones, rims, and high-Mg rinds (Figure 8A, B, E-G). These chemical zones are used to constrain the composition and nature of kimberlites. Here, we summarize previous studies and interpretations of kimberlitic olivine textural and geochemical results. 6.1. Cores Compositionally distinct cores are found in macrocrysts, phenocrysts, and nodules. These cores are compositionally diverse (e.g., Arndt et al., 2010; Boyd & Clement, 1977; Bussweiler et al., 2015; Clement, 1982; Cordier et al., 2015; Howarth & Taylor, 2016; Kamenetsky et al., 2008; Nielsen & Sand, 2008). Core morphologies can include anhedral, round, angular, and resorbed textures (Figure 8A,H,I) (Abersteiner et al., 2020; Kamenetsky et al., 2008; Pilbeam et al., 2013). They can contain inclusions of mantle mineral phases like chrome diopside (Figure 8A), garnet, and orthopyroxene (Bussweiler et al., 2015; Kamenetsky et al., 2008, 2009; Lim et al., 2018). Cores are envisaged to be either xenocrystic in origin (Brett et al., 2009; Bussweiler et al., 2015; Giuliani, 2018; Howarth & Taylor, 2016; Kamenetsky et al., 2008) or a product of early stage kimberlite crystallization (A. E. Moore, 2012). The compositions of olivine cores are diverse within a kimberlite and core compositions tend to be broadly similar to olivine compositions from the mantle lithosphere that the kimberlite ascended through. Thus, cores are likely directly derived from the lithospheric mantle and are modified and entrained by early the kimberlite. 34 6.2. Rims Olivine rims are found on macrocrysts (Figure 8A, G), phenocrysts (Figure 8B, F) , and nodules (Abersteiner et al., 2020; Arndt et al., 2010; Brett et al., 2009; Bussweiler et al., 2015; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004; Giuliani et al., 2017; Mitchell, 1973; Kamenetsky et al., 2008). Rims are considered to have crystallized from the kimberlite magma. Small phenocrysts can be coreless, comprised entirely of “rim” material (e.g., Bussweiler et al., 2015). For a given kimberlite, forsterite compositions of the rims are invariant. Rim forsterite composition varies between kimberlites but can be broadly similar between kimberlites in a given cluster (Giuliani, 2018), giving individual kimberlites their own magmatic “local flavour” (Pilbeam et al., 2013) (e.g.,Figure 9). Reported Ni compositions generally decrease from the inner rim to the outer rim with a sharp increase in Ca at the edge of the rim (e.g., Bussweiler et al., 2015; Giuliani, 2018; Kamenetsky et al., 2008; Pilbeam et al., 2013). Rims can contain primary mineral inclusions (Figure 8B, F, G), most commonly spinel and ilmenite (Howarth & Taylor, 2016; Kamenetsky et al., 2008), this gives the rims a ‘dusty’ appearance relative to cores (Pilbeam et al., 2013). Rims form more euhedral habits (Figure 8B, F) than cores (Brett et al., 2009; Pilbeam et al., 2013). Rim material can crystalize along cracks in the core (observed in BSE images from Brett et al., 2015), indicating that decompression cracking in olivine is concurrent with rim crystallization (Howarth & Taylor, 2016). Alternatively, sealed internal cracks filled with carbonate and the lack of decompression cracks in olivine rims suggest that the majority of decompression occurs before olivine rim crystallization (Brett et al., 2009, 2015). Olivine rims are generally accepted to be the product of crystallization of primary, magmatic olivine from the kimberlite melt. 35 6.3. Internal Zones Diverse, simple, and complex internal zonation often exist between the core and rim of kimberlitic olivine, worldwide (Abersteiner et al., 2020; Bussweiler et al., 2015; Cordier et al., 2015; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004; Howarth & Taylor, 2016; Kamenetsky et al., 2008; Lim et al., 2018; Pilbeam et al., 2013; Soltys et al., 2018). Terminology for internal zones is often inconsistently defined. Their origins remain ambiguous, yet important for understanding the early life of kimberlites. Diffuse, gradational zones are likely the product of diffusion within the existing crystal or reaction diffusion of the core within an early kimberlitic melt. More discrete, defined zones are either formed from a metasomatic interaction between olivine and a proto-kimberlitic fluid (or earlier pulses of evolved kimberlites) or are zones that have been crystallized from an early kimberlite during (or directly prior to) ascent. Kamenetsky et al. (2008) first referred to internal zones as “transitional layers” and “separating layers”. These discrete internal zones have variable forsterite compositions and enriched Ni compositions. Contrastingly, transitional zones identified by Pilbeam et al. (2013) are a diffuse contact between the core and margin (or rim). Their transitional zones are apparently less discrete than those imaged by Kamenetsky et al. (2008) and are marked by a symmetrical change in Mg # from core to margin. Transitional zones identified by Pilbeam et al. (2013) have high Ni compositions (i.e., similar to or slightly higher than Ni compositions of the olivine core) that symmetrically decreases further from the transition zone, within the margin. Their modeling suggests transition zones could be the product of diffusive equilibration after margin crystallization. They alternatively consider that transition zones could be the product of early crystallization or diffusion during metasomatism. 36 Transition zones of similar textural and geochemical character are identified and documented by Cordier et al. (2015). Due to the inconsistent presence of transition zones and the mismatched timescales between diffusion and kimberlite ascent, Cordier et al. (2015) discount diffusive equilibration as the dominant transition zone forming process. Rather, they attribute asymmetric transition zones to early magmatic modification, more specifically, percolation of fluids along grain boundaries, in-situ in the mantle shortly before entrainment. Additionally, Cordier et al. (2015) identify a single occurance of a discrete internal zone, M1, that is marked by low Fo and high Ni and Mn similar to low Fo separating zones identified by Kamenetsky et al. (2008) M1 zone was previously imaged but not identified by Fedortchouk & Canil, (2004). Cordier et al. (2015) attribute the high-Fe M1 zone to crystallization from an early basaltic melt in the mantle lithosphere. Howarth and Taylor (2016) identify internal zones that they refer to as “melt zones” and “transition zones”. Transition zones are diffuse gradational zones, similar to those identified by Pilbeam et al. (2013). Howarth and Taylor (2016, 2019) attribute the transition zones to partial equilibration with an early kimberlitic melt that had assimilated orthopyroxene at the base of the lithosphere. Melt zones described by Howarth and Taylor (2016) have a low, narrow forsterite composition (~Fo89.5)and a gradationally decreasing Ni composition. Melt zones are notably not the same as rims. Melt zones are apparently similar to the M1 zone that was termed by Cordier et al. (2015) and previously identified or imaged by (Brett et al., 2009; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004; Kamenetsky et al., 2008). These melt zones are more euhedral and interpreted to be a product of kimberlite melt crystallization (Howarth & Taylor, 2016). They find that melt zones can form in the olivine core along decompression cracks (akin to Brett et al. 37 (2009, 2015)). This bolsters a kimberlite melt crystallization genesis of the melt zone. However, other textural evidence of the melt zone is contradictory as the melt zone is found cross-cutting crystals of a polycrystalline dunite nodule (Howarth & Taylor, 2016), which suggests the melt zone is actually an equilibration zone. Thus, they propose the melt zone could have formed through both equilibration and kimberlite melt crystallization in transit. Lim et al. (2018) identify internal zones, distinguishing between internal zones and transitional zones. Transitional zones refer to diffuse zones between the core and rim, consistent with Cordier et al. (2015),Pilbeam et al. (2013), and Howarth and Taylor (2016) . Lim et al. interpret transitions zones to be an in-transit equilibration of the xenocrystic core with the kimberlitic melt. Contrastingly, their internal zone refers to a discrete zone with resorbed textures, apparently similar to M1 (Cordier et al., 2015) and melt zones (Howarth & Taylor, 2016). These internal zones have narrow, low forsterite compositions and variable NiO and MnO compositions. They suggest that internal zones crystallized from prior kimberlite pulses, in-situ in the mantle (Lim et al., 2018). Soltys et al. (2018), (2020) identify internal zones with intermediate compositions between the cores and rims. Their internal zones have euhedral habits and they interpret internal zones to be crystallized during early kimberilite ascent (similar to interpretation by Giuliani & Foley, 2016), primarily based on mineral inclusions of co-crystallizing oxides. They also identify internal zone (I) (Soltys et al., 2020) akin to M1 (Cordier et al., 2015), melt zone (Howarth & Taylor, 2016), and internal zone (Lim et al., 2018). Soltys et al. (2020) attribute this zone to crystallization from a melt. 38 6.4. High-Mg Rinds Anomalously Mg-rich rinds (or Mg-rich rims (Howarth & Taylor, 2016)) are present as a fringe on the outside of some olivine grains (i.e., Figure 8E) and have been observed at numerous kimberlites (Abersteiner et al., 2020; N. Arndt et al., 2022; Brett et al., 2009; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004; Howarth & Gross, 2019; Howarth & Taylor, 2016; Kamenetsky et al., 2008; Lim et al., 2018; Pilbeam et al., 2013; Soltys et al., 2018; Tovey et al., 2020, 2021). Not all studies identify and name the high-Mg rinds as such, but their data show exotic, high-Mg compositions (Figure 9) and a very dark BSE response on the fringes of olivine grains. They often have elevated Mn and Ca with depressed Ni compositions. The origin of the Mg-rich rinds is unclear, but they are like due to either magmatic crystallization (Abersteiner et al., 2020; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004; Giuliani et al., 2020; Lim et al., 2018; Soltys et al., 2018), re-equilibration of the olivine with a late-stage carbonatitic melt (Howarth & Taylor, 2016; Pilbeam et al., 2013,) or are the result of resorption (Bussweiler et al., 2015) or reaction of olivine with a late-stage oxidizing fluid (Arndt et al., 2022). In the case of magmatic crystallization, to achieve high-Mg olivine, two explanations are employed. The first is an extreme fO2 (Bussweiler et al., 2015; Howarth & Büttner, 2019; Howarth & Taylor, 2016) that changes Fe from Fe2+ to Fe3+, which is too large to fit into olivine causing Mg enrichment. The second explanation is an overall depletion of Fe due to sequestration by co-crystallizing oxide phases (Bussweiler et al., 2015). An additional ‘outmost rind’, identified by their distinct lack of inclusions, are documented by Aberstiener et al. (2020), who conclude the outmost rinds are the result of late-stage crystallization. 39 Figure 9: Previous EMPA results of Leslie olivine plotted as Mg # vs NiO wt% EMPA (Bussweiler et al., 2015). Olivine core compositions (blue circles) overlap with both the harzburgite and lherzolite slave mantle olivine (blue squares). Rims (red circles and triangles) have an invariant Mg # with decreasing NiO composition. True phenocrysts (red triangles) lack a xenocrystic core and their composition overlaps with the lower NiO wt% range of the “melt-trend’. High-Mg rinds (yellow triangles) show an exotically high Mg composition and low NiO wt%. 40 7. Olivine Populations in The Leslie Kimberlite Here we identify, describe, and discuss four populations of olivine distributed within the Leslie pipe: phenocrysts (Figure 10), macrocrysts (Figure 11), dunite nodules (Figure 12(D)-(F)), and mantle-xenolith hosted olivine (Figure 12(A)-(C)). We introduce olivine populations based on their distinguishing petrographic properties first, followed by their chemical zonation and other properties observed with the SEM in the next section. 7.1. Phenocrysts Olivine phenocrysts show a continuous range of size and morphologies from large (<1 mm), distinct subhedral crystals (Figure 10) to small, groundmass-sized, euhedral crystals (Figure 15: column four, row three). Olivine phenocrysts are not as pervasively cracked as macrocrysts. 7.2. Macrocrysts Olivine macrocrysts are large (>1 mm) and commonly rounded, ameboid, and bulbous in shape. Macrocrysts can also be subhedral, featuring partially rounded crystal terminations (Figure 11). Olivine macrocrysts have pervasive cracks and trails of inclusions (Figure 15: column three). Less often, they have deformation bands or can host mineral inclusions with sizes <500 µm of garnet, chrome diopside, ilmenite, or other minor phases (Figure 15: column three, row two). 41 Figure 10: Fresh, large (950 µm), subhedral olivine phenocryst from LDC-01-226.94mA. (A) Plane light photomicrograph with labels on features. Cracks cross-cut the entire crystal. Trails of inclusions are more abundant in the center of the crystal. Higher concentration of oxide inclusions in the rim. B. BSE image with labeled core (C), mid-zone (M), rim (R), and rind (Rd). (C) Schematic of the phenocryst showing the core is irregularly shaped and embayed. The bright mid-zone fills embayments and creates a smoother outer surface. The rim has a higher concentration of bright, oxide inclusions and its final habit is subhedral with round crystal terminations. The dark rind is on the entire exterior of the crystal and has an undulous, embayed contact with the rim. The contact with the groundmass is fritted. Cracks cross-cut all zones and the crystal is only slightly altered in the north east. 42 Figure 11: Fresh, small (1.2 mm) olivine macrocryst from LDC-01-226.94mA. (A) Plane light photomicrograph with labels on features. (B) BSE image if the olivine macrocryst (C) A schematic of the olivine macrocryst with labeled core (C), mid-zone (M), rim (R), and rind (Rd). The core is ameboid with deformation bands (not apparent in cross polarized light). A thick, irregular, diffuse mid-zone mantles the entire core. The rim, especially in the west, shows a more subhedral habit than the anhedral core and mid-zone. The dark rind is patchy, irregular, and sparse. 43 7.3. Mantle-Xenolith Hosted Olivine Several thin sections contain mantle-derived peridotite xenoliths that are easily observable in hand sample. In these samples, mantle xenoliths consist of coarse-grained garnet, chrome diopside, and olivine (Figure 12A). The mantle xenoliths are generally round but can be easily broken. Olivine grains in mantle xenoliths are equant and sub- to anhedral with cracks and trails of inclusions (Figure 13 column one). In hand sample, rare olivine crystals have garnet and clinopyroxene inclusions. 7.4. Dunite Nodules Polycrystalline “nodules”, as defined by Arndt et al. (2006, 2010), comprise of large anhedral olivine crystals that contain small tablet-shaped neoblastic olivine crystals (Figure 12D). Nodules are pervasive throughout Leslie samples but are low in abundance. Nodule morphology can be round or broken with sizes ranging from 1-5 mm. The large anhedral olivine grains usually show deformation features, internal cracks, trails of inclusions, and recrystallization features. (Figure 15: column two). The two types of subgrain neoblasts are euhedral/table-shaped and anhedral, likely forming from annealing and deformation respectively (Drury & Roermund, 1988). Neoblasts are inclusion free, and “clean” relative to the larger anhedral crystal (Figure 12D). 44 Figure 12: (A)-(C) A small (3 mm), heavily altered mantle xenolith from Leslie with garnet, clinopyroxene, and olivine from LDC-09-168.8mA. (A) Plane light photomicrograph of the xenolith. (B) BSE image of the mantle xenolith. (C) Schematic of the xenolith with labeled core (C) and rim (R). The olivine rim is discontinuous and shows breakage textures. Rims are rich in oxide inclusions and only occur on the outside of the crystal and along crystal grain boundaries. (D)-(F) A dunite nodule (1.1 mm) with neoblasts. (D) Plane light photomicrograph of the nodule. (E) BSE image of the nodule. (F) Schematic of the nodule with labeled core (C) and rim (R). “Clean” neoblasts are euhedral fine-grained crystals inside the larger anhedral olivine that shows patchy undulose extinction. 45 7.5. Summary of Olivine Populations Four olivine populations are observed in the Leslie kimberlite: phenocrysts, macrocrysts, polycrystalline dunite nodules, and mantle xenolith-hosted olivine. Mantle xenolith-hosted olivine (Agashev et al., 2013; Giuliani et al., 2016; Hilchie et al., 2014; Menzies et al., 2004; Sazonova et al., 2015; Soltys et al., 2016), polycrystalline dunite nodules (Abersteiner et al., 2020; Arndt et al., 2006, 2010, 2022; Boyd & Clement, 1977; Cordier et al., 2015; Kamenetsky et al., 2008; A. E. Moore, 1988; Shaikh et al., 2021), macrocrysts (Brett et al., 2009; Bussweiler et al., 2015; Clement, 1982; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004; Kamenetsky et al., 2008; Kjarsgaard et al., 2010; Scott Smith et al., 2018), and phenocrysts (Brett et al., 2009; Bussweiler et al., 2015; Fedortchouk & Canil, 2004; Kamenetsky et al., 2008; Kjarsgaard et al., 2010; Scott Smith et al., 2018) are reported in kimberlites worldwide with varying vernacular. Petrographically, Leslie olivine does not deviate strongly from the four populations described throughout the literature. For categorizing olivine macrocrysts and phenocrysts, we follow definitions in Scott Smith et al. (2018), which defines macrocrysts as slightly larger than some other definitions (e.g., <0.5 mm by Bussweiler et al. (2015)). Megacrystic olivines (>1 cm) are described as a distinct olivine population and are observed in kimberlites worldwide (Abersteiner et al., 2019; Bussweiler, 2019; Cone & Kopylova, 2021; Howarth, 2018; Howarth & Büttner, 2019; Kopylova et al., 2009; A. Moore & Costin, 2016; Shaikh et al., 2021). We do not identify olivine megacrysts in our thin section sample suite, but we do recognize olivine megacrysts may be present in drill core hand samples. Further targeted sampling of Leslie for megacrysts may help to define a true, distinct megacrystic population. 46 Figure 13: Examples of olivine features (deformation bands, core mineral inclusions, and rim mineral inclusions) in the four olivine populations where red arrows indicated the feature of interest. All images are taken in BSE, cross polarized (deformation bands), or plane polarized light (macrocryst core inclusions). 47 8. Zonation of Olivine Populations in Leslie The SEM study of olivine illuminates zonation, contacts, and textures that are otherwise not easily nor convincingly observable with a petrographic microscope (Figure 12, Figure 11, and Figure 10). Leslie olivine crystals are more often zoned than not (Figure 15 column five). Zonation includes cores, mid-zones, rims, and rinds. Based on the BSE grey-scale brightness response, the most common sequence of zonation, is a dark core, followed by a thin bright zone (mid-zone), and finally a rim of moderate brightness (Figure 10). This sequence can occur without a bright mid-zone (Figure 15 column four, row one) and, in rare occasions, can occur with a bright core (Figure 15 column four, row three). In addition to the dominant zonation pattern (i.e., dark core, bright mid-zone, and rim), many olivine grains have a thin, extremely dark rind on the exterior edge of the crystal (Figure 14, Figure 17). In some samples, monticellite coronas are pervasive and show a bright white-grey BSE response relative to the host olivine (Figure 19). 8.1. Cores Cores generally have a dark BSE response, while some rare cores exhibit a bright BSE response. The cores of many olivine grains (Figure 15: row one) feature complex morphologies that can be angular (Figure 15 column four, row one), undulous, irregular, and/or embayed (Figure 10). Olivine cores are not euhedral and are rarely smoothly round. When a dark core lacks a surrounding mid zone, its morphology is smooth, whereas when a mid-zone is present, its morphology displays more embayments and irregularities. This rule of thumb does not apply to bright cores, which are embayed and irregular regardless of the surrounding zone. The 48 contacts between cores and the enclosing olivine (i.e., a mid-zone or a rim) vary greatly and can be from sharp or gradational contacts. 8.2. Mid-Zones Mid-zones are bright relative to the dark cores and moderate rims. They appear to fill in, or even cause, irregularities in the core’s morphology (Figure 10). Thus, the mid-zone’s contact with the surrounding rim is smooth. Both the inner contact with the core and the outer contact with the rim are evenly sharp within a crystal. Cracks and trails of inclusions in the core are sometimes thinly highlight by this mid-zone (Figure 13: column two, row two), suggesting formation of this material during cracking. The mid-zone only commonly forms embayments and along cracks in the core but never protrudes into the rim (Figure 10). 8.3. Rims Rims have a moderate BSE response (Figure 15: row three) and have a higher concentration of small oxide inclusions, primarily spinel (Figure 15: row three). The rim is the most consistent, ubiquitous zone within Leslie olivine and is found on all olivine populations (i.e., macrocrysts, phenocrysts, nodules, and mantle xenoliths, including broken olivine). Similar to mid-zones, rims can crystallize along cracks in the core. When present in phenocrysts, this rim creates the final euhedral olivine shape with distinct crystal terminations (Figure 15: column four). On macrocrysts, the rim is thin relative to the large olivine core and can create round, semi-subhedral crystal terminations, predominantly simply mantling the core (Figure 15: column three). Rims on nodules only occur on the larger, anhedral host olivine crystal and not on the smaller neoblasts (Figure 12 (E), (F)). Mantle xenolith hosted olivine (Figure 15 column one) can 49 have rims that occur only on the outside of the xenolithic olivine. The rim can follow crystal boundaries that are in contact with the xenolith’s exterior (Figure 12 (B), (C)). 8.4. Rinds The last zone visible with the SEM are extreme dark rinds (Figure 15 row four). Rinds are not found on all olivine crystals and are readily obscured by serpentinization. The rind’s contact with the host olivine crystal is usually quite smooth, sharp and undulous when it occurs as a uniform zone (Figure 15: row four). The dark rind in some instances appears in or on the rim of the crystal as small blobs (Figure 11, Figure 10). The rind’s surface contact with the groundmass can be smooth but is more often scalloped, sawtooth, or fritted (Figure 14). As we discuss later, Figure 14: (A) A phenocryst with a thick, non-uniform rind that has a sharp, undulous contact with the rim. (B) The rind displays fine-scale zoning. (C) A uniform rind on a phenocryst. (D) The rind has a fritted, sawtooth contact with the groundmass. 50 rinds are found on broken surfaces, including rind formation on core, mid-zone, and rim (Figure 17). Rinds can be mantled by monticellite coronas, when the two co-exist (Figure 19), but rinds can exist independent of monticellite coronas. Figure 15: Examples of olivine zones (core, mid-zone, rim, and rind) and non-zone olivine in the four olivine populations. Cores and rims are the most ubiquitous zones in all olivine populations. Red arrows indicate the zone of interest. All images taken with BSE. 51 9. Other Olivine Features 9.1. Rounded Olivine Olivine macrocrysts are often round and their rims are non-continuous (Figure 16). Where rims are missing, the core and the groundmass, a monticellite corona, a high FO rind, or alteration. The apparent thinning of macrocryst rims is either due to insufficient volume of olivine to fully crystallize on the outside of the core or abrasion of pre-existing rims. If abrasion is removing rims, abrasion and rounding must occur after rim formation. Figure 16: A round olivine macrocryst from Leslie (sample LDC-04-285.71mB) with a missing (abraded?) rim. Rim material exists along an internal crack in the core. 52 9.2. Broken Olivine All Leslie samples have broken olivine, and all olivine populations have broken equivalents, but broken olivine is dominantly derived from macrocrysts. Broken olivine is Figure 17: (A) Rind forming on a broken surface of an olivine crystal that is “caught in the act” of breaking. (B) Scallop-textured rind on a broken surface of an olivine with a core, mid-zone, and rim. 53 petrographically identified by its angular and broken morphology. With the SEM, broken olivine can be readily identified by their truncated chemical zones (Figure 17 (B)). Breakage forms angular olivine occurs after rim crystallization and after any olivine rounding. Notably, rinds can occur on broken surfaces. We present evidence of rind formation on the broken face of a crystal that is in the process of breaking (Figure 17(A)). Thus, rinds form after olivine breakage and potentially in-situ. 9.3. Monticellite Coronas on Olivine Olivine grains can have monticellite coronas and, where present, monticellite is ubiquitously found on almost all olivine grains of a sample. Monticellite coronas are ubiquitous on olivine from samples LDC-01-74.25m (JJG-5012), LDC- 01-194.7m (JJG-5019), LDC-07-52.3m, LDC-04-111.17m, LDC-04-198.82m, and LDC-04-285.71m and is sparsely observed on LDC-07-234.0m (Figure 18). The remaining Leslie samples are completely devoid of monticellite coronas on olivine. The majority of Leslie samples have abundant primary groundmass monticellite (see Appendix C for petrographic descriptions). Monticellite coronas are <35 µm thick, varying between samples, between crystals, and between crystal faces of the same crystal. When monticellite coronas form on phenocrysts, they preserve the overall euhedral habit (Figure 19 A-C). Monticellite crystal faces are pitted and are rarely perfectly planar (Figure 19 F). When monticellite coronas form on macrocrysts and nodules, they uniformly mantle the olivine grain with a habit similar to that of the host olivine. On the SEM, monticellite appears bright in comparison to the host olivine crystal and darker than groundmass oxides. It can display faint, fine scale zoning (Figure 19 F) and hosts 54 numerous, diverse inclusions. The nature of the monticellite corona – host olivine contact is best observed with the SEM and ranges from non-uniform, scalloped, and jagged to planar. Similar to rinds, monticellite coronas can form on broken olivine surfaces (Figure 19 D) and are also found on surfaces of macrocrysts where rims are missing (Figure 19 E). Monticellite coronas appear to overprint olivine serpentinization and rinds, thus, monticellite forms last and in situ. Monticellite coronas can either be pseudomorphic replacement of olivine (Abersteiner et al., 2018), monticellite overgrowth (Kampata et al., 1994), or dense groundmass “necklaces”. Figure 18: West – east cross section of the Leslie Kimberlite showing distribution of where monticellite coronas occur on olivine grains (pink circles). 55 Figure 19 (A) A photomicrograph in plane light of a phenocryst with increased concentration of inclusions at the margins. (B) BSE image of the phenocryst showing a core, rim, high-Mg rind, and monticellite corona. The general shape of the euhedral grain is maintained, but the contact with the groundmass is irregular. (C) Schematic of the phenocryst to show the resorbed nature of the contact between the rind and rim and between the monticellite and rind. (D) A broken, zoned macrocryst with monticellite replacement on the broken surface. (E) A round macrocryst with monticellite replacement on an abraded surface. (F) A phenocryst with fine scale, monticellite zoning. 56 9.4. Summary of Leslie Olivine Textures Four separate olivine populations were identified through petrographic observation. The four populations include mantle xenolith-hosted olivine, nodules, macrocrysts and phenocryst. Macrocrysts and phenocrysts are observed in all samples. Nodules and mantle xenolith-hosted olivine are not present in all samples and their absence does not necessarily represent a true variance between samples, rather their absence is likely a reflection of their overall low abundance. Olivine grain sizes are variable between thin sections samples because of observed local, hand sample grain sorting. Chemical zones in these four populations were identified with BSE imaging on the SEM. All samples have both non-zoned olivine and zoned olivine. Zoned olivine grains always have cores and rims ± mid-zone. Olivine population and zonation diversity is homogenous between samples. Diversity of olivine zonation manifests as differences in the degree and presence of rinds, monticellite coronas, and/or alteration (i.e., all post-breakage products). Here we reconcile olivine features in the Leslie kimberlite with those from other kimberlites. Kimberlitic olivine is often zoned and, at minimum, zoned olivine comprises a core and rim (e.g., Brett et al., 2009; Giuliani, 2018; Howarth & Taylor, 2016; Kamenetsky et al., 2008, etc.). The presence and nature of core and rim zonation in Leslie nodules, macrocrysts, and phenocrysts is consistent with olivine from other kimberlites. However, to our knowledge, there are no other studies that document olivine rim crystallization on peridotite mantle xenoliths (Figure 12). Olivine internal/transition zones in Leslie, referred to as mid-zones here, have similar textural and BSE character to the M1 zone of Cordier et al. (2015). We do not identify more than one internal zone but do recognize that diffuse contacts of the core and rim could be 57 considered a transition zone by some groups (e.g., Pilbeam et al., 2013). High- Mg rinds have been observed at other kimberlites worldwide (e.g., Abersteiner et al., 2020; Soltys et al., 2018). Rinds in Leslie contain an increase in inclusions similar to Lim et al. (2018) and Abersteiner et al. (2020) and are texturally diverse as continuous thin layers, patchy zones, or fritted edges. Finally, monticellite coronas on olivine crystals are rarely reported in other kimberlites. Monticellite coronas are common on Leslie olivine (this study, Abersteiner et al., 2018; Bussweiler et al., 2015) and may be somewhat unique to the Leslie kimberlite. Our textural results are inconclusive as to how monticellite coronas are formed on olivine. 58 10. Major and Minor Elements in Olivine Electron microprobe analyses in xenolith-hosted olivine, nodules, macrocrysts, and phenocrysts (Table 4) quantify the nature of chemical zonation observed with the SEM. Analyses positioned on transects from core to rim show geochemical differences between zones and changes within zones. See Appendix B for all EMPA measurements, uncertainty, LODs, and calculated forsterite compositions. For example, in the phenocryst from Figure 10 and Table 5, the dark-colored core (Fo~93) and bright-colored mid-zone (Fo~89) are each geochemically homogenous in terms of major and minor elemental concentrations (Figure 20). The moderate-colored rim (Fo~92) decreases in NiO wt% from interior rim to exterior rim. See an example of an EMPA transect for a macrocryst in Figure 21. Table 4 Breakdown of EMPA analyses by the number of crystals and the number of points analyzed grouped by sample and by olivine population. Number of Crystals Analyzed Sample Macrocrysts Phenocrysts Dunite Nodules Peridotite Xenolith Total Number of Analyses LDC-01-140.8m 9 24 1 1 35 114 LDC-01-226.9m 6 25 2 0 33 137 LDC-03-270m 2 8 2 0 12 69 LDC-04-111.2m 3 6 2 0 11 30 LDC-04-192.8m 10 9 1 0 20 89 LDC-04-285.7m 6 5 0 1 12 51 LDC-07-234.0m 4 11 1 0 16 86 LDC-07-304.9m 9 1 0 0 10 36 LDC-09-68.2m 6 17 2 1 26 121 LDC-09-89.9m 7 7 0 0 14 64 LDC-09-168.8 m 7 14 1 1 23 106 Total Number of Crystals 69 127 12 4 212 - Number of Analyses 351 428 84 40 - 903 59 Table 5 An example of olivine EMPA major and minor element analyses and recalculation of an olivine phenocryst from sample LDC-01-226.94m A, EMPA crystal 8 (Figure 20). Below the oxide weight percent sums the recalculated cation proportions and sums are reported. Mole percent of forsterite (Mg/(Mg+Fe) *100) is reported as Fo. Average 2σ and LOD for oxide measurements from these nine points are reported in the final two columns. Analysis-Zone 1-C 2-C 3-C 4-C 5-M 6-M 7-R 8-R 9-R 2 σ LOD SiO2 wt% 41.03 40.99 41.08 40.87 40.64 40.04 40.70 40.51 40.21 0.44 0.13 TiO2 wt% b.d.l. b.d.l. b.d.l. b.d.l. 0.03 0.04 b.d.l. b.d.l. 0.07 0.01 0.04 FeO wt% 6.86 6.81 7.07 7.08 10.98 11.10 8.15 7.91 8.01 0.26 0.11 NiO wt% 0.35 0.37 0.34 0.38 0.20 0.17 0.37 0.23 0.15 0.05 0.08 MnO wt% 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.10 0.17 0.19 0.14 0.12 0.16 0.04 0.07 MgO wt% 51.63 51.78 51.85 51.84 48.38 48.45 50.26 50.42 50.56 0.53 0.10 CaO wt% b.d.l. b.d.l. b.d.l. b.d.l. b.d.l. b.d.l. 0.05 0.03 0.13 0.01 0.03 Sum wt% 99.96 100.01 100.41 100.31 100.42 100.01 99.68 99.25 99.28 - - Si 0.994 0.991 0.992 0.989 0.997 0.989 0.995 0.993 0.987 - - Ti 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.001 - - Fe 0.139 0.138 0.143 0.143 0.225 0.229 0.167 0.162 0.164 - - Ni 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.004 0.003 0.007 0.004 0.003 - Mn 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.002 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.003 - - Mg 1.864 1.870 1.866 1.869 1.770 1.784 1.832 1.843 1.850 - - Ca 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.003 - Sum 3.006 3.009 3.009 3.011 3.002 3.011 3.005 3.006 3.012 - - Fo 93.06 93.13 92.90 92.88 88.71 88.61 91.66 91.91 91.83 - - Olivine: C=Core, M=Mid-Zone, R=Rim b.d.l. = Below Detection Limit, LOD = Limit of Detection 60 Figure 20 (A) BSE image of phenocryst from sample LDC-01-226.94mA with nine EMPA points along a core-rim transect (red). Geochemical results are reported in Table 5. Core (C), mid-zone (M), rim (R), and rind (Rd) zones are labeled on the grain. (B) Geochemical line plot of Forsterite on left y-axis (green) and NiO wt% on right y-axis (red) corresponding to EMPA transect from core to rim. The blue, orange, and yellow shading represent the core, mid-zone, and rim, respectively. (C) Geochemical line plot of Forsterite and MnO wt% from core to rim. (D) Geochemical line plot of Forsterite and CaO wt% from core to rim. 61 Figure 21 (A) BSE image of macrocryst from sample LDC-04-285.71mB with seven EMPA points along a core-rim transect (red). Core (C), mid-zone (M), rim (R), and rind (Rd) zones are labeled on the grain. (B) Geochemical line plot of Forsterite on left y-axis (green) and NiO wt% on right y-axis (red) corresponding to EMPA transect from core to rim. The blue, orange, and yellow shading represent the core, mid-zone, and rim, respectively. (C) Geochemical line plot of Forsterite and MnO wt% from core to rim. (D) Geochemical line plot of Forsterite and CaO wt% from core to rim. Geochemical results can be found in appendix D. 62 10.1. Cores Olivine cores are geochemically variable in terms of Forsterite content. Microprobe results show that cores with a bright BSE response have a low Fo composition while dark cores have higher Fo compositions (e.g., dark core in Figure 20). In all Leslie samples, and through all olivine populations, olivine core forsterite compositions range from Fo85.7 to Fo93.8 (Figure 23 and Table 6). Olivine cores in zoned grains have an overall elevated NiO concentrations with an average of 0.35 ± 0.04 (1σ) NiO wt% (Table 6). To convert NiO wt% to Ni ppm, the original NiO wt% is multiplied by 7858. Thus, core Ni ppm is 2800 ± 380 (1σ). Cores of zoned grains overlap with olivine compositions from the slave mantle from previous studies (grey cloud in Figure 23) (Aulbach et al., 2007; Kopylova & Caro, 2004; MacKenzie & Canil, 1999; Menzies et al., 2004). Non-zoned olivine (i.e., cores and rims with indistinguishable BSE responses) phenocryst cores can have substantially lower NiO concentrations and thus, their cores can plot low within the NiO wt% rim geochemical field (Figure 23). 10.2. Mid-Zone Mid-zones were identified in BSE images by their bright response relative to the rim. EMPA results confirm that mid-zones tend to have a lower forsterite content than rims and most cores (Figure 23). Mid-zones have variable forsterite compositions, typically around Fo93 (Table 6). The mid-zone geochemically overlaps with the low Fo cores with slightly depressed NiO concentrations of 0.27 ±0.07 (1σ) NiO wt%(Table 6) or 2170 ± 520 (1σ) (Figure 23). The mid-zones with higher Fo values and higher NiO wt% (~Fo92 and >~0.3 wt% NiO) overlap with rim Fo and NiO compositions (Figure 23). MnO values of the mid-zone are slightly elevated relative to the Mn in high-Mg cores (Figure 20(C) and Figure 24), with an average of 0.14 ± 0.03 (1σ) MnO 63 wt% (Table 6). Overall, Mn is negatively correlated with forsterite and thus, is also negatively correlated with Mg. 10.3. Rims On the SEM, rims are the most ubiquitous zone within all olivine populations (Figure 26), and they have the same moderate BSE response throughout all samples and crystals. EMPA results confirm that rims are the most invariant forsterite compositional zone at ~Fo91.8 (Table 6). NiO wt% is highly variable in rims, especially dependent upon the distance from the core. NiO wt% has a continuous downward trend in the rims starting from ~0.4 decreasing to ~0.1 (Figure 22) corresponding to a range of ~3170 to ~1130 ppm. This downward trend in NiO wt% can be observed within individual rims from the interior toward the margin of the rim (Figure 20B). CaO wt% increases at the margin of olivine rims (Figure 20D). 10.4. Rinds Rinds are the darkest olivine zone observed with the SEM and are often dusty with inclusions. EMPA results confirm the dark rind has an extreme Mg composition. Forsterite compositions of rinds are ~Fo97.1 (Table 6) and have very low NiO concentrations at ~0.07 NiO wt% (Table 6), generally below detection limit. MnO and CaO are elevated and above detection limit in the rinds compared to all other zones (Table 6, Figure 24, and Figure 25). 64 Table 6 EMPA olivine summary results for all Leslie samples and all olivine populations. Averages of Forsterite (Fo), NiO, MnO, and CaO are reported with one standard deviation. Statistics are categorized by zones core, mid-zone, rim, and rind. See appendix D for all data. Rind NiO wt% is below detection limit and core and mid-zone CaO wt% is very close to detection limit. Zone Average ± 1σ Core Mid-Zone Rim Rind Fo 91.98 ± 1.41 90.26 ± 1.18 91.83 ± 0.34 97.12 ±1.08 NiO wt% 0.36 ± 0.05 0.27 ± 0.07 0.24 ± 0.1 0.07 ± 0.04 (b.d.l.) MnO wt% 0.11 ± 0.03 0.14 ± 0.03 0.12 ± 0.02 0.28 ± 0.07 CaO wt% 0.04 ± 0.08 0.04 ± 0.7 0.07 ± 0.09 1.08 ± 0.61 Figure 22: Normalized distance from core vs NiO Wt% EMPA data from LDC-01 Olivine Rims grouped by the point’s distance from the interior contact. Distance is a percent of that rim’s thickness and is binned in intervals of 10%. Points close to the interior contact are dark blue and grade to yellow closer to the rim margin. Points close to interior rim contact have high NiO wt% while points closer to the rim margin have lower NiO wt%. A linear regression fit line is in red and the linear regression equation and R2 values are reported in the bottom left. 65 Figure 23: Olivine EMPA results (n=903) of Forsterite vs NiO wt% for all samples from the Leslie kimberlite, grouped by olivine zone. Cores are blue and show diverse forsterite compositions and relatively elevated NiO Wt%. Some cores plot within the rim field and these represent analyses in the cores of non-zoned olivine (i.e., true, magmatic phenocrysts). Mid-zones are orange and show overlap with the low-forsterite cores but have overall lower NiO Wt% than cores. Rims are yellow have invariant forsterite compositions but vary greatly in NiO Wt%, overlapping with core, mid-zone, and rind compositions. Rinds are purple and are of extreme forsterite content with low NiO Wt% at and around detection limit. The grey cloud represents geochemistry of olivine from mantle xenoliths sampled from kimberlites on the central slave craton from previous studies (Aulbach et al., 2007; MacKenzie & Canil, 1999; Menzies et al., 2004). 66 Figure 24 Olivine EMPA results (n=903) of Forsterite vs MnO wt% for all samples from the Leslie kimberlite, grouped by olivine zone. Cores decrease in MnO wt% with increasing forsterite composition. Mid-zones have slightly elevated MnO wt% relative to cores of similar forsterite composition. Rim MnO compositions overlap with cores of the similar forsterite compositions. Rinds have elevated MnO wt% relative to the other zones. 67 Figure 25: Olivine EMPA results (n=903) of Forsterite vs CaO wt% for all samples from the Leslie kimberlite, grouped by olivine zone. Most cores and mid-zones are close to or below detection limit. Some rims have slightly elevated CaO compositions. Rinds have elevated CaO wt% relative to all other zones. 68 Figure 26: Olivine EMPA results (n=903) of Forsterite vs NiO wt% from the Leslie kimberlite, grouped by olivine zone where each subplot represents the four olivine populations: phenocrysts (top left), macrocrysts (top right), nodules (bottom left), and xenoliths from this study (bottom right). 69 10.5. T-tests EMPA results show little variability between samples. T-tests were performed with an objective to confirm if zonation observed petrographically and geochemically are also found to be statistically distinct samples. Two-sample t-tests of unequal samples sizes and unequal variance (Welch’s t-test) were performed in MATLAB using the “ttest2” function. T-tests were performed to compare the forsterite and NiO compositions of the four zones (i.e., cores, mid-zones, rim, and rinds), lumping analyses from all samples. Two student t-tests (i.e., a t-test to test forsterite and a t-test to test NiO) were performed for each of the objectives above at a significance level of 0.05 for with the following null and alternative hypotheses: H0: The mean forsterite and NiO composition of the two zones are equal, respectively. Ha: The mean forsterite and NiO composition of the two zones are not equal, respectively. Table 7: T-test results comparing each zone. “R” means at least one of the forsterite and NiO t-tests were individually rejected. Sample sizes, as the number of EMPA points in total, are listed in the final row (n=). When at least one of the forsterite or NiO t-tests resulted in null hypothesis rejection, the reported result (Table 7) is an overall rejection of the null hypothesis, reported as “R”. An “R” indicates the mean of the two samples are statistically not equal. If both t-tests result in a failure to reject the null hypothesis, we report this as “A”. Results from t-tests comparing the Core Mid-zone Rim Rind Core Mid-zone R Rim R R Rind R R R n= 504 84 273 43 70 four zones all resulted in a rejection (“R”) of the null hypothesis (Table 7). In other words, no zone is statically, chemically equal to another zone. This confirms petrographically observed zonation. Following all of the parameters discussed above, additional t-tests were performed comparing individual samples, subdivided by zone with the following hypotheses: H0: The mean forsterite and NiO composition of the two samples are equal, respectively. Ha: The mean forsterite and NiO composition of the two samples are not equal, respectively. Table 8: T-test results comparing all sample cores to each other. “R” means at least one of the forsterite and NiO t-tests were individually rejected. “A” means both of the forsterite and NiO t-tests failed to reject the null hypothesis. Sample sizes, as the number of EMPA points in total, are listed in the final row (n=). 09-68 09-89 07-234 03-270 04-285 09-168 04-111 04-192 07-304 01-226 01-140 09-68 09-89 R 07-234 R A 03-270 R R R 04-285 R R R A 09-168 R A A R R 04-111 R R R A A R 04-192 R R R A A R A 07-304 R R R A A A A A 01-226 R A A R R A R R A 01-140 R R R R R R R R A A n= 78 44 56 33 22 51 17 44 18 65 63 T-test results comparing samples to each other, subdivided by zone are found in (Table 8, Table 9, and Table 10) . T-test results show that cores of an individual sample are often not equal to the cores of another sample (i.e., “R”) (Table 8). Core t-test rejections likely reflect the kimberlite’s sampling of the heterogenous forsterite compositions of mantle olivine to produce 71 the diverse forsterite compositions of cores within and between samples. T-test results confirm the core forsterite variability observed petrographically and geochemically throughout Leslie (Figure 23). 09-68 09-89 07-234 03-270 04-285 09-168 04-111 04-192 07-304 01-226 01-140 09-68 09-89 A,R 07-234 A,A A,A 03-270 A,R R,R A,R 04-285 A,R A,R A,R R,A 09-168 A,R A,A A,A A,R R,R 04-111 A,A A,A A,A A,A A,A A,A 04-192 A,R A,A A,R A,A A,R A,A A,A 07-304 A,R A,A A,R A,A R,R A,A A,A A,A 01-226 A,A AA A,A A,R A,R A,A A,A A,R A,R 01-140 A,A A,A A,A A,R R,R A,A A,A A,R A,R A,A n= 32 15 15 17 21 36 6 26 13 48 34 Rim t-tests are inconclusive because results are split between rejecting the null hypothesis and failing to reject the null hypothesis (Table 9). Rims fail to reject the null hypothesis (“A”) more often than core t-tests fail to reject the null hypothesis. However, we expected rim t-tests to fail to reject the null hypothesis (i.e., not enough evidence to conclude the two samples are different) significantly more than they do in Table 9. The larger the t-statistic is relative to t critical value (dependent on degrees of freedom and alpha level), the stronger the evidence is for a rejected null, dependent on the degrees of freedom. The t-statistic is calculated with sample means in the numerator and standard errors in the denominator, and because standard Table 9: T-test results comparing all sample rims to each other. Results in the cell represent the two t-test results with NiO t-test result listed first, then the forsterite t-test result. “R” means the null hypothesis was rejected and “A” means we failed to reject the null hypothesis. A red cell indicates the overall result was a rejected null hypothesis. Samples sizes, as the number of EMPA points in total, are listed in the final row (n=). Ni, Fo 72 deviation is in the denominator, t-statistics might be sensitive to data with low standard deviations. Forsterite compositions in rims have low standard deviations and thus, there might be more null hypothesis rejections that result from the low standard error than are truly the result of a difference in means. We did not perform t-tests on mid-zones because their population sizes within individual samples are too low for robust statistical analysis. Mid-zones population sizes are small because mid-zones are not found in all crystals and are thin and moderately variable between samples. For samples where rinds were preserved, we collected enough EMPA compositions in several samples to perform crude t-tests (Table 10). However, larger sample sizes would result in a more rigorous t-test result. Rind t-test results show that rinds are dominantly the same between samples (i.e., “A”). Table 10: T-test results comparing all sample rinds to each other. “R” means at least one of the forsterite and NiO t-tests were individually rejected. Sample sizes, as the number of EMPA points in total, are listed in the final row (n=). 07-234 03-270 09-168 01-226 03-270 A 09-168 A A 01-226 A R A 01-140 A R A A n= 6 6 7 7 10.6. Monticellite Here we present EMPA results (n=9) of groundmass monticellite (I) and as a corona around olivine (II) (Table 11). Monticellite analyses show significantly higher amounts of CaO than forsterite olivine in this study. Monticellite compositions between monticellite coronas and monticellite show no significant differences. 73 Table 11 EMPA results of monticellite from the Leslie kimberlite from holes LDC-04 and LDC-03. Below the oxide weight percent sums the recalculated cation proportions and sums are reported. Monticellite: GM=Groundmass Monticellite, MC=Monticellite Corona Drillhole LDC-04 LDC-03 Depth 111.17mA 192.82mB 285.71mB 270mA Grain-Spot (Mtc Type) C6-6 GM C6-9 MC C3-3 MC C11-4 MC C9-3 GM C5-5 MC C6-2 MC C11-7 MC C6-5 GM SiO2 wt% 37.39 37.07 37.08 37.06 36.30 37.37 37.45 37.33 37.54 TiO2 wt% b.d.l. b.d.l. 0.06 b.d.l. 0.05 0.09 0.15 0.09 0.06 FeO wt% 2.01 1.96 2.30 2.10 2.41 2.31 2.02 2.19 1.96 MnO wt% 0.20 0.23 0.34 0.30 0.29 0.32 0.27 0.25 0.34 NiO wt% b.d.l. b.d.l. b.d.l. b.d.l. b.d.l. b.d.l. b.d.l. b.d.l. b.d.l. MgO wt% 24.28 23.07 24.94 24.29 24.66 24.75 24.28 23.84 25.01 CaO wt% 35.83 36.79 34.56 35.87 34.37 34.80 35.27 36.24 34.84 Sum wt% 37.39 37.07 37.08 37.06 36.30 99.66 99.43 99.95 99.74 Si 0.989 0.990 0.984 0.983 0.977 0.988 0.992 0.988 0.999 Ti 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.002 0.000 Fe 0.044 0.044 0.051 0.047 0.054 0.051 0.045 0.048 0.054 Mn 0.005 0.005 0.008 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.008 Ni 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 Mg 0.957 0.918 0.987 0.960 0.990 0.975 0.959 0.940 0.940 Ca 1.015 1.052 0.983 1.019 0.992 0.986 1.001 1.027 0.999 Total 3.011 3.010 3.015 3.016 3.022 3.010 3.005 3.011 3.001 74 11. Discussion In the Leslie kimberlite the following four distinct olivine populations are observed: mantle xenolith-hosted olivine, nodules, macrocrysts, and phenocrysts. Chemical zoning manifests in all populations as cores, mid-zones, and rims (Figure 28). Additional, late-stage textures include olivine breakage, high-Mg rind formation, serpentinization, and monticellite coronas (Figure 28). 11.1. Homogeneity of Pre-Emplacement Olivine Olivine populations and features are uniform between all Leslie samples. All samples contain olivine phenocrysts, macrocrysts, and broken equivalents. Not all samples contain nodules and mantle xenolith-hosted olivine because of their low abundance in Leslie. All samples have olivine containing cores of diverse forsterite composition and rims of invariant forsterite composition ± mid-zones of low forsterite composition (Figure 23). Pre-breakage processes form diverse, yet consistent olivine zonation diversity throughout Leslie (homogenous). Although olivine may reflect diverse processes, particularly mid-zone formation, these olivine-recorded processes had time to mix and homogenize throughout the pipe. These ubiquitous pre-eruption processes include the following: a. Liberation and incorporation of olivine. In the mantle, olivine is incorporated into kimberlite melt as subhedral to anhedral, equant mantle peridotite grains (Figure 28(a.)), becoming xenocrysts and subsequently olivine cores. Leslie sample the mantle between 25kbar - 53kbar according to Leslie mantle xenolith thermobarometry by Menzies et al., 2004. This roughly corresponds to depths of ~80km and ~180 km, respectively. Cores are mantle xenocrysts because in zoned 75 macrocrysts and phenocrysts, cores have similar major element geochemistry to olivine in mantle xenoliths and cores can have inclusions of other mantle phases (e.g.., chrome diopside and garnet). Additionally, the presence of mantle xenoliths in kimberlites indicates there is a direct relationship between kimberlite olivine and mantle olivine. In the Leslie kimberlite, mantle xenoliths were entrained throughout ascent across two dominant mantle layers composed of harzburgite (<150 km) and lherzolite (150 km - >200 km) (Menzies et al., 2004). Olivine xenocrysts were liberated from disaggregated mantle xenoliths throughout the ascent of the Leslie kimberlite, but were predominantly incorporated when xenoliths were newly entrained and rapidly decompressed as described by Brett et al. (2009). b. Resorption of cores during early ascent. Lower forsterite cores qualitatively display more resorbed textures (Figure 28(b.)) than their high forsterite counterparts (only in the absence of mid-zones). Low forsterite cores are likely derived from the deeper lherzolite layer (>150 km depth) (Menzies et al., 2004) based on their major element overlap with the lherzolitic olivine compositions (Bussweiler et al., 2015; Menzies et al., 2004). Thus, low forsterite cores are likely incorporated first, spending more time corroding in early, silica-undersaturated kimberlite melt. These observations match the observations and conclusions from Bussweiler et al. (2015). However, Bussweiler et al. (2015) explicitly reject a low Fo (Fo86) olivine core analysis and their data show no other cores below ~Fo90. Our data show (Figure 23, Figure 24, and Figure 25) that there is a significant population of cores below Fo90 and rejection of low Fo core data is not warranted. We were able to identify a true population of low Fo cores that were 76 missed by other groups studying Leslie because of our large sample suite and number of samples. c. Mantle Peridotites: entrained cores and modification to form mid-zones. In the mantle, prior to xenolith liberation and olivine incorporation into the kimberlite magma, there was likely an in-situ, localized metasomatic modification event where peridoditic mantle olivine interacted with an early kimberlite melt to form the mid-zones (e.g., “M1” from Cordier et al. (2015)) (Figure 28(c.)). We do not see evidence that the mid-zone was formed through crystallization from the bulk kimberlite magma and if that were the case, we would expect to see ubiquitous, consistently thick, potentially euhedral mid-zones. Mid-zones are not always present in olivine grains and often discontinuous within a single olivine grain, therefore mid-zones either (I) formed in-situ, in the mantle or (II) were ubiquitously formed and subsequently resorbed on some grains. In the case of (I), localized areas of mantle peridotite-hosted olivine were infiltrated by a percolating proto-kimberlite melt to reactively form the mid-zone. In the case of (II), all olivine cores reacted with an ascending early kimberlite melt to form the mid-zone. We favor the hypothesis that mid-zones, and their embayed textural relationship with the core, are likely the result of localized disequilibration reaction between olivine and early kimberlitic fluid in-situ the mantle prior to entrainment. This is similar to mantle metasomatism that has been previously documented preceding kimberlite magmatism (Arndt et al., 2010; Cone & Kopylova, 2021; Cordier et al., 2015; Jollands et al., 2018; Kopylova et al., 1999; Soltys et al., 2020). Ultimately, the processes that form the mid-zone remain unclear and further work needs to be done, specifically higher frequency EMPA transects than analyzed here. 77 Here we explore the processes that may have formed the mid-zone. The disequlibration event that modified olivine cores to form mid-zones either occurred through core interaction with a compositionally disparate magma where (I) the core – mid-zone contact represents a reaction front and the mid-zone is the diffusional product of that reaction, or (II) the olivine core underwent a coupled dissolution and reprecipitation event, described by Putnis, (2009) in other minerals and systems. Below we explore the potential processes that formed of the mid-zone in the context of other magmatic systems and minerals. Figure 27: Abridged and adapted from figure 3 from de Maisonneuve et al. (2016). EMPA intensity maps of magnesium and phosphorus of crystal A3. The magnesium zoning in this olivine shows reverse zoning and concentration adjacent to embayments. The phosphorus zoning in the olivine recorded skeletal growth (S), slow growth in a crystal mush (M) and embayments formed during a recharge event (R). 78 Embayments in magmatic crystals are often attributed to corrosion or resorption of a crystal out of equilibrium with a magma (e.g., Higgins, 2006; Streck, 2008; Tsuchiyama, 1985). de Maisonneuve et al. (2016) present EMPA intensity maps of an olivine from Volcán Llaima that recorded multiple magmatic and resorption histories. An example of a reversely zoned olivine crystal from their study (Figure 27) broadly displays similar patterns to the mid-zone formed in olivine from the Leslie kimberlite. Although not described by de Maisonneuve et al. (2016), their intensity maps show that magnesium compositional changes are associated with and are most intense adjacent to embayments (Figure 27). Oscillatory zones of enriched phosphorus, attributed to rapid olivine crystallization (Milman-Barris et al., 2008), are crosscut by embayments. de Maisonneuve et al. (2016) conclude embayments are produced during a recharge event (the olivine crystal is out of equilibrium with the recharge magma), and the magnesium changes associated with these embayments are later formed slowly in a crystal mush. Alternatively, the related change in Mg could be a diffusional product. In olivine from the Leslie kimberlite, mid-zones show a similar texture to the crystal in Figure 27 (i.e., enriched Mg adjacent to embayments) whereby the mid-zone is most often adjacent to embayments into the core. Thus, the mid-zone and its embayed core contact could be the product of diffusion during a disequilibrium event. Alternatively, the core – mid-zone contact in Leslie olivine is similar to textures attributed to the coupling of mineral dissolution and reprecipitation observed for many other minerals (Konrad-Schmolke et al., 2018; Putnis, 2009, 2014), in olivine (Majumdar et al., 2016), and experimentally (Spruzeniece et al., 2017). Putnis 2009 describes this process 79 where a parent mineral dissolves in a corrosive fluid, supersaturing the fluid directly adjacent to the parent crystal. The thin layer of fluid is supersaturated to the point of crystal nucleation and reprecipitation of a daughter mineral on the resorbed parental mineral surface. They suggest coupling can be achieved when the rate of dissolution is lower than the rate of nucleation (i.e., a low activation energy barrier) with an increase in porosity along crystal defects. Konrad-Schmolke et al. (2018) describe these meso- and micro- scale dissolution and reprecipitation reaction fronts as texturally lobate, finger-like, or denticle-like. These textural descriptions and their SEM images are strikingly similar to our observed textures at the core – mid-zone interface. Thus, the mid-zone may have formed through this a dissolution and reprecipitation event. We can texturally speculate about the formation of the mid-zone, but ultimately our data are insufficient to confidently conclude on the specific processes that form the mid-zone. d. Primary crystallization of olivine rims. Rims (Figure 28(d.)) have a consistent forsterite composition (~Fo91.8) between all crystals in the Leslie kimberlite. The Leslie kimberlite has a higher olivine rim Fo composition relative to many other Lac de Gras kimberlites including Grizzly, Koala, Panda, A154N, A154S, Rattler, and others (Tovey et al., 2021). Olivine rims tend to form euhedral crystal habits on phenocrysts and, in macrocrysts, are thin relative to the host crystal. These observations are consistent with olivine rim growth controlled by surface area of the underlying crystal modelled by Brett (2009). Rims crystallized on cores and mid-zones, dominantly trapping primary chromite inclusions. Notably, rims can also form small, core- 80 less crystals, suggesting there is a population of “true phenocrysts” with a purely magmatic origin, this is in agreeance with findings from Bussweiler et al. (2015). e. Rounding of olivine and other cargo. Olivine and other mantle cargo is rounded in kimberlites (Figure 28(e.)) and milling is thought to be continuous during ascent (Jones et al., 2014). We found that macrocrystic olivine rims are preferentially abraded, while little to no abrasion occurs on smaller olivine phenocrysts. Mechanical and/or chemical abrasion likely competes with olivine growth during crystallization. f. Olivine breakage. Breakage of olivine crystals can occur throughout kimberlite ascent (Figure 28(f.)). Cracking and breaking can occur early, during mid-zone formation and rim crystallization (i.e., mid-zones and rims form along cracks in the core). Breakage can also occur late-stage during eruption and extrusion (i.e., we observe several instances of olivine grains breaking in-situ). Below we utilize broken crystals from syn- and post-eruption to inform on timing of late-stage event. 11.2. Heterogeneity of Post-Emplacement Olivine. Pre-eruptive diversity of olivine populations and zonation in the Leslie kimberlite is consistent, as described above, whereas heterogeneities occur post-breakage and post-eruption. Variation manifests on different scales, that is, between drill-holes, between samples, and between olivine grains within a thin section. Heterogenous syn- and post-emplacement processes include the following: 81 g. High-Mg rind formation. High-Mg rinds (Figure 28(g.)) are variable in terms of their thickness, form, symmetry, and presence between olivine grains within a single thin section. Rinds form after olivine breaking as indicated by their presence on broken surface. Fritted and/or scalloped rind-groundmass contact and the often undulous, embayed rind-host olivine contact suggests rinds are the product of olivine reacting with a late-stage melt and not the results of a late-stage melt. Rind formation as a product of reaction agrees with findings from Arndt et al. (2022). They suggest rinds formed through a reaction and replacement processes (akin to the process we propose forms the mid-zone (a.) and described by Putnis (2009)). h. Monticellite coronas on olivine. Monticellite coronas (Figure 28(h.)) are present in all three samples of drillhole LDC-04 and in samples LDC-01-74.25m (JJG-5012), LDC- 01-194.7m (JJG-5019), LDC-07-52.3m, and LDC-07-234.0m. Aberstiener et al. (2018) also report monticellite coronas in LDC-07 at an unknown depth. Monticellite corona formation is constrained to after olivine breakage and after high-Mg rind formation because monticellite forms on broken surfaces and on the outside of rinds. Monticellite has an undulous, degradational textured contact with the host olivine yet preserves the host crystal’s general morphology, imparting a slightly more pitted surface. Textures of monticellite coronas on olivine, and its organization within the pipe, suggest that it is a late-stage alteration product likely caused by reaction with a carbonate melt (proposed by Abersteiner et al., 2018) trapped in localized areas or carbonate melt percolating along preferential pathways in the emplaced kimberlite body. In the Leslie pipe, this preferential pathway is dominantly through the eastern half of the Leslie pipe, at drill- 82 hole LDC-04, where monticellite coronas are the thickest and most ubiquitous. More broadly, monticellite coronas exclusively occur throughout the southern half of the Leslie pipe (Figure 18). 83 Figure 28: Events recorded by kimberlite olivine grains during their entrainment, ascent, eruption, and extrusion. In blue, xenocryst entrainment and liberation (a. occurs before mid-zone formation (b.). Rim crystallization (d.) occurs after mid-zone formation. Rim crystallization can be contemporaneous with parts of xenocrystic core liberation because liberation can occur throughout kimberlite ascent. Rounding of macrocrysts (e.) occurs dominantly after rim crystallization (d.) because rims on macrocrysts are often abraded. Breakage (f.) occurs after rounding (e.). Breakage can also occur during disaggregation, contemporaneously with a.- d., during ascent. High-Mg rinds (g.) and monticellite coronas (h.) are observed on broken surfaces, and thus, form after breakage. Finally, monticellite coronas occur after high-Mg rinds. *Depth of events is illustrated to show relative timing and is not to scale. 84 Figure 29: The Leslie kimberlite ascent and emplacement schematic as recorded by olivine. Cores are liberated into the ascending kimberlite, then mid-zones and rims form during in transit. Upon emplacement olivine grains can break and then can form high-mg rinds and/or monticellite coronas. Lithosphere cross section and garnet peridotite photomicrograph are adapted from Russell et al., 2012. 85 12. Conclusions and Sampling Suggestions The Leslie kimberlite provides a superb opportunity to study fresh olivine throughout a extrusive coherent kimberlite (ECK) within one dominant kimberlite phase. We petrographically identify four olivine populations: 1. Phenocrysts: Small (<1 mm) olivine with subhedral to euhedral morphologies. Phenocrysts include olivine that is distinctly larger than the groundmass and micro-phenocrysts of similar size to groundmass minerals. Phenocrysts can contain xenocrystic cores. 2. Macrocrysts: Large (>1 mm) olivine with anhedral (round, embayed, or bulbous) or subhedral morphologies. Often have undulose extinction and have large mantle mineral inclusions. 3. Nodules: Polycrystalline dunite grains that comprise large, subhedral olivine containing smaller, anneals and recrystallized olivine tablets and grains. 4. Mantle xenolith-hosted olivine: Olivine in small, coarse-grained, polymineralic garnet peridotite mantle xenoliths. These four populations, and their broken counterparts, are found homogeneously throughout the Leslie kimberlite. Therefore, entrainment and ascent processes recorded by olivine are the same throughout the pipe or there was sufficient mixing to produce a homogenous body. Not all olivine crystals are zoned, but when they are, they can contain a maximum of five chemical zones. Cores, mid-zones, rims, rinds, and monticellite coronas exist in some combination in the four olivine populations. 86 1. Distinct cores range in forsterite content (Fo85.74 – Fo93.76) and have elevated NiO concentrations at ~0.36 (x)̅ wt%, showing significant overlap with Slave mantle olivine compositions. Olivine cores are xenocrysts derived from the mantle (Figure 29). Bright low forsterite cores (<~Fo91) feature resorbed/embayed textures while mid-high forsterite cores (>~Fo91) are more often round/smooth or angular. Cores of lower forsterite composition are more likely derived from the deeper, more fertile lherzolite layer in the Slave mantle defined by Menzies et al. (2004). Low fo cores likely resided in and reacted with the early ascending, assimilating kimberlite melt to form resorbed textures. This is consistent with conclusions from Bussweiler et al. (2015). 2. Bright mid-zones have low forsterite compositions (~Fo91) and are discontinuous, have a strongly embayed/resorbed contact with the core, and have a smooth contact with the rim. Interaction between the xenocrystic core and an early metasomatizing proto-kimberlite melt/fluid likely formed these mid-zones through disequilibrium and partial dissolution of the olivine xenocrysts combined with diffusion-driven replacement. Many olivine crystals do not contain a mid-zone, and this is either because they formed from an in situ metasomatic interaction with the proto-kimberlite or a previously formed mid-zone was fully resorbed in an early kimberlite melt. Variability of mid-zone presence is observed evenly on the inter-grain scale. Further work needs to be done on mid-zones to truly rule out a magmatic crystallization origin. 3. Magmatically crystallized rims form during ascent (Figure 29) and form euhedral habits on phenocrysts and are abraded or round on macrocrysts. They are the most chemically ubiquitous zone between all olivine crystals with an invariant Fo composition of ~Fo92 87 and a NiO compositions that decreases throughout the rim. NiO is concentrated at the interior of the rim likely due to fractional crystallization of olivine. The high distribution coefficient of NiO between olivine and melt, estimated to be DNi>20 for kimberlites (Cordier et al., 2015; Girnis et al., 2013), allows for early preferential Ni incorporation in the rim. The Ni-depleted melt then crystallizes the outer olivine rim. 4. High-Mg rinds have enigmatic compositions with Fo compositions of (~Fo96.7) and elevated NiO, CaO, and MnO relative to other zones. Rinds form on the fringes of olivine crystals, including broken surfaces of crystals “caught-in-the-act” of breaking (Figure 29). The interior rind contact and outer rind morphologies highly variable textures and symmetry. Rinds are variably present on the inter-grain scale within samples, and because they form post-fracturing, rinds reflect a heterogeneously distributed process (i.e., reaction or replacement suggested in the discussion). Further work needs to be done on high-Mg rinds to rule out an origin of magmatic crystallization. 5. Finally, some samples contain ubiquitous monticellite coronas on olivine grain margins, including on broken surfaces. The monticellite preserves the original morphology of the host olivine crystal and has an undulous, degradational internal contact. Monticellite is a post-emplacement and likely forms as a replacement process that preferentially pseudomorphs samples from the southern half of the pipe. These could represent areas with higher degrees of carbonate melt (i.e., the reactant to form monticellite replacement (Abersteiner et al., 2018)). From this study of olivine throughout a single phase in Leslie, we propose the following sampling recommendations for future olivine studies. Few samples from a kimberlite phase 88 should suffice to study pre-emplacement kimberlite olivine entrainment, ascent, and transport processes. Our work shows that mantle sampling, xenocrystic core modification, rim crystallization, cracking, and rounding, are homogeneously distributed throughout the single phase of Leslie. Post-emplacement, high forsterite rind variability occurs on the inter-grain scale and thus, can usually be captured with few samples as well. Notably, rarer populations and features, such as mantle xenoliths, nodules, and mid-zones, are very challenging to capture in a single thin section. For kimberlites with multiple phases or events of kimberlite magmatism, each phase should be sampled to capture any heterogeneity between phases. In contrast with the above pre-emplacement sampling, systematic sampling is required to capture heterogenetic post-emplacement processes occurring on the inter-sample scale (i.e., serpentinization and monticellite coronas). Systematic sampling is no easy endeavor, as described in this thesis. Many existing olivine studies shy away from strenuous sampling and therefore have few samples or poor geological context for their samples. We emphasize that robust kimberlite sampling techniques are invaluable for geologically contextualizing textural and geochemical olivine results. 89 References Abersteiner, A., Kamenetsky, V. S., Graham Pearson, D., Kamenetsky, M., Goemann, K., Ehrig, K., et al. (2018). Monticellite in group-I kimberlites: Implications for evolution of parental melts and post-emplacement CO2 degassing. Chemical Geology, 478(May 2017), 76–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2017.06.037 Abersteiner, A., Kamenetsky, V. S., Goemann, K., Golovin, A. V., Sharygin, I. S., Pearson, D. G., et al. (2019). Polymineralic inclusions in kimberlite-hosted megacrysts: Implications for kimberlite melt evolution. Lithos, 336–337, 310–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2019.04.004 Abersteiner, A., Kamenetsky, V. S., Goemann, K., Kjarsgaard, B. A., Rodemann, T., Kamenetsky, M., & Ehrig, K. (2020). A genetic story of olivine crystallisation in the Mark kimberlite (Canada) revealed by zoning and melt inclusions. Lithos, 358–359, 105405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2020.105405 Afanasyev, A. A., Melnik, O., Porritt, L., Schumacher, J. C., & Sparks, R. S. J. (2014). Hydrothermal alteration of kimberlite by convective flows of external water. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 168(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00410-014-1038-y Agashev, A. M., Ionov, D. A., Pokhilenko, N. P., Golovin, A. V., Cherepanova, Y., & Sharygin, I. S. (2013). Metasomatism in lithospheric mantle roots: Constraints from whole-rock and mineral chemical composition of deformed peridotite xenoliths from kimberlite pipe Udachnaya. Lithos, 160–161(1), 201–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2012.11.014 Arndt, N., Boullier, A., Clement, J., Dubois, M., & Schissel, D. (2006). What olivine, the neglected mineral, tells us about kimberlite petrogenesis (Vol. 1). Retrieved from www.electronic-earth.net/1/15/2006/ Arndt, N., Guitreau, M., Boullier, A.-M. M., Le Roex, A., Tommasi, A., Cordier, P., & Sobolev, A. (2010). Olivine, and the origin of kimberlite. Journal of Petrology, 51(3), 573–602. https://doi.org/10.1093/petrology/egp080 Arndt, N., Cordier, C., Boullier, A., & Batanova, V. (2022). Olivine in kimberlites – macrocrysts, megacrysts and dunitic nodules, all from the same metasomatized source. Journal of Petrology. Aulbach, S., Griffin, W. L., Pearson, N. J., O’Reilly, S. Y., & Doyle, B. J. (2007). Lithosphere formation in the central Slave Craton (Canada): Plume subcretion or lithosphere accretion? Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 154(4), 409–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00410-007-0200-1 Bailey, D. K. (1980). Volatile flux, geotherms, and the generation of the kimberlite-carbonatite-alkaline magma spectrum. Mineralogical Magazine, 43(330), 695–699. https://doi.org/10.1180/minmag.1980.043.330.02 Berg, G. W., & Carlson, J. A. (1998). The Leslie kimberlite pipe of Lac de Gras, Northwest Territories, Canada: evidence for near surface hypabyssal emplacement. In Extended abstracts: VOL 7: INTERNATIONAL KIMBERLITE CONFERENCE, CAPE TOWN (pp. 3–5). https://doi.org/10.29173/ikc2639 Boyd, F. R., & Clement, C. R. (1977). Compositional zoning of olivines in kimberlites of the De Beers mine, Kimberley, South Africa. Carnegie Institute Washington Yearbook., 76, 485–493. van Breemen, O., Davis, W. J., & King, J. E. (1992). Temporal distribution of granitoid plutonic 90 rocks in the Archean Slave Province, northwest Canadian Shield. Https://Doi.Org/10.1139/E92-173, 29(10), 2186–2199. https://doi.org/10.1139/E92-173 Brett, R. C. (2009). Kimberlitic Olivine. https://doi.org/10.29173/ikc2573 Brett, R. C., Russell, J. K., & Moss, S. (2009). Origin of olivine in kimberlite: Phenocryst or impostor? Lithos, 112(9), 201–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2009.04.030 Brett, R. C., Russell, J. K., Andrews, G. D. M., & Jones, T. J. (2015). The ascent of kimberlite: Insights from olivine. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 424, 119–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2015.05.024 Bussweiler, Y. (2019). Polymineralic inclusions in megacrysts as proxies for kimberlite melt evolution—a review. Minerals, 9(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/min9090530 Bussweiler, Y., Foley, S. F., Prelević, D., & Jacob, D. E. (2015). The olivine macrocryst problem: New insights from minor and trace element compositions of olivine from Lac de Gras kimberlites, Canada. Lithos, 220–223, 238–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2015.02.016 Canil, D., & Fedortchouk, Y. (1999). Garnet dissolution and the emplacement of kimberlites. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 167(3–4), 227–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0012-821X(99)00019-9 Cas, R., Porritt, L., Pittari, A., & Hayman, P. (2008). A new approach to kimberlite facies terminology using a revised general approach to the nomenclature of all volcanic rocks and deposits: Descriptive to genetic. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 174(1–3), 226–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2007.12.018 Clement, C. R. (1982). A comparative geological study of some major kimberlite pipes in the Northern Cape and Orange Free State. PhD Dissertation. University of Cape Town. Cone, D., & Kopylova, M. (2021). Origin of megacrysts by carbonate-bearing metasomatism: a case study for the Muskox kimberlite, Slave craton, Canada. Journal of the Geological Society, 178(3), jgs2020-184. https://doi.org/10.1144/jgs2020-184 Cordier, C., Sauzeat, L., Arndt, N. T., Boullier, A., Batanova, V., & Barou, F. (2015). Metasomatism of the Lithospheric Mantle Immediately Precedes Kimberlite Eruption : New Evidence from Olivine Composition and Microstructures. Journal of Petrology, 56(9), 1775–1796. https://doi.org/10.1093/petrology/egv054 Dredge, L. A., Kerr, D. E., & Wolfe, S. A. (1999). Surficial materials and related ground ice conditions, Slave Province, N.W.T., Canada. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 36(7), 1227–1238. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjes-36-7-1227 Drury, M. R., & Roermund, H. L. M. va. (1988). Fluid assisted recrystallization in upper mantle peridotite xenoliths from kimberlites. Journal of Petrology, 30(1), 133–152. https://doi.org/10.1093/petrology/30.1.133 Fedortchouk, Y., & Canil, D. (2004). Intensive variables in kimberlite magmas, Lac de Gras, Canada and implications for diamond survival. Journal of Petrology, 45(9), 1725–1745. https://doi.org/10.1093/petrology/egh031 Girnis, A. V., Bulatov, V. K., Brey, G. P., Gerdes, A., & Höfer, H. E. (2013). Trace element partitioning between mantle minerals and silico-carbonate melts at 6-12GPa and applications to mantle metasomatism and kimberlite genesis. Lithos, 160–161(1), 183–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2012.11.027 Giuliani, A. (2018). Insights into kimberlite petrogenesis and mantle metasomatism from a 91 review of the compositional zoning of olivine in kimberlites worldwide. Lithos, 312–313, 322–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2018.04.029 Giuliani, A., & Foley, S. F. (2016). The geochemical complexity of kimberlite rocks and their olivine populations: A comment on Cordier et al. (Journal of Petrology, 56, 1775-1796, 2015). Journal of Petrology, 57(5), 921–926. https://doi.org/10.1093/petrology/egw026 Giuliani, A., Phillips, D., Kamenetsky, V. S., & Goemann, K. (2016). Constraints on kimberlite ascent mechanisms revealed by phlogopite compositions in kimberlites and mantle xenoliths. Lithos, 240–243(2016), 189–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2015.11.013 Giuliani, A., Soltys, A., Phillips, D., Kamenetsky, V. S., Maas, R., Goemann, K., et al. (2017). The final stages of kimberlite petrogenesis: Petrography, mineral chemistry, melt inclusions and Sr-C-O isotope geochemistry of the Bultfontein kimberlite (Kimberley, South Africa). Chemical Geology, 455(January), 342–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2016.10.011 Giuliani, A., Graham Pearson, D., Soltys, A., Dalton, H., Phillips, D., Foley, S. F., et al. (2020). Kimberlite genesis from a common carbonate-rich primary melt modified by lithospheric mantle assimilation. Science Advances, 6(17), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaz0424 Griffin, W. L., Doyle, B. J., Ryan, C. G., Pearson, N. J., Reilly, S. Y. O., Davies, R., et al. (1999). Layered Mantle Lithosphere in the Lac de Gras Area , Slave Craton : Composition , Structure and Origin. Journal of Petrology, 40(5), 705–727. Gurney, J. J., Jakob, W. R. ., & Dawson, J. B. (1975). Megacrysts from the Monastery Kimberlite Pipe, South Africa, 16, 227–243. Hayman, P. C., & Cas, R. A. F. (2011). Criteria for interpreting kimberlite as coherent: Insights from the Muskox and Jericho kimberlites (Nunavut, Canada). Bulletin of Volcanology, 73(8), 1005–1027. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-011-0512-x Higgins, M. D. (2006). Quantitative Textural Measurements in Igneous and Metamorphic Petrology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Hilchie, L., Fedortchouk, Y., Matveev, S., & Kopylova, M. G. (2014). The origin of high hydrogen content in kimberlitic olivine : Evidence from hydroxyl zonation in olivine from kimberlites and mantle xenoliths Group 2. LITHOS, 202–203, 429–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2014.06.010 Howarth, G. H. (2018). Olivine megacryst chemistry, Monastery kimberlite: Constraints on the mineralogy of the HIMU mantle reservoir in southern Africa. Lithos, 314–315(July 2018), 658–668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2018.07.007 Howarth, G. H., & Büttner, S. H. (2019). New constraints on archetypal South African kimberlite petrogenesis from quenched glass-rich melt inclusions in olivine megacrysts. Gondwana Research, 68, 116–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2018.11.009 Howarth, G. H., & Gross, J. (2019). Diffusion-controlled and concentric growth zoning revealed by phosphorous in olivine from rapidly ascending kimberlite magma, Benfontein, South Africa. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 266, 292–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2019.08.006 Howarth, G. H., & Taylor, L. A. (2016). Multi-stage kimberlite evolution tracked in zoned olivine from the Benfontein sill, South Africa. Lithos, 262, 384–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2016.07.028 92 Jollands, M. C., Hanger, B. J., Yaxley, G. M., Hermann, J., & Kilburn, M. R. (2018). Timescales between mantle metasomatism and kimberlite ascent indicated by diffusion profiles in garnet crystals from peridotite xenoliths. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 481, 143–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2017.10.021 Jones, T. J., Russell, J. K., Porritt, L. A., & Brown, R. J. (2014). Morphology and surface features of olivine in kimberlite: Implications for ascent processes. Solid Earth, 5(1), 313–326. https://doi.org/10.5194/se-5-313-2014 Jones, T. J., Russell, J. K., & Sasse, D. (2019). Modification of Mantle Cargo by Turbulent Ascent of Kimberlite. Frontiers in Earth Science, 7, 134. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2019.00134 Kamenetsky, V. S., Kamenetsky, M. B., Sobolev, A. V., Golovin, A. V., Demouchy, S., Faure, K., et al. (2008). Olivine in the Udachnaya-East kimberlite (Yakutia, Russia): Types, compositions and origins. Journal of Petrology, 49(4), 823–839. https://doi.org/10.1093/petrology/egm033 Kamenetsky, V. S., Kamenetsky, M. B., Weiss, Y., Navon, O., Nielsen, T. F. D., & Mernagh, T. P. (2009). How unique is the Udachnaya-East kimberlite ? Comparison with kimberlites from the Slave Craton ( Canada ) and SW Greenland. LITHOS, 112, 334–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2009.03.032 Kamenetsky, V. S., Kamenetsky, M. B., Sobolev, A. V, Golovin, A. V, Sharygin, V. V, Pokhilenko, N. P., & Sobolev, N. V. (2009). Lithos Can pyroxenes be liquidus minerals in the kimberlite magma ? LITHOS, 112, 213–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2009.03.040 Kampata, D. M., Nixon, P. H., Salemink, J., & Demaiffe, D. (1994). Monticellite in the Gwena kimberlite (Shaba, Zaïre): evidence of late-magmatic crystallization. Mineralogical Magazine, 58(392), 496–501. https://doi.org/10.1180/minmag.1994.058.392.18 Kjarsgaard, B. A., Pearson, D. G., & Malarkey, J. (2010). The Kimberlite Olivine Phenocryst / Macrocryst / Xenocryst Problem , Re-Visited. GeoCanada 2010, Cratons, Kimberlites and Diamonds Plenary Session, 1–2. Konrad-Schmolke, M., Halama, R., Wirth, R., Thomen, A., Klitscher, N., Morales, L., et al. (2018). Mineral dissolution and reprecipitation mediated by an amorphous phase. Nature Communications, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03944-z Kopylova, M. G., & Caro, G. (2004). Mantle xenoliths from the Southeastern Slave craton: Evidence for chemical zonation in a thick, cold lithosphere. Journal of Petrology, 45(5), 1045–1067. https://doi.org/10.1093/petrology/egh003 Kopylova, M. G., Russell, J. K., & Cookenboo, H. (1999). Petrology of peridotite and pyroxenite xenoliths from the Jericho Kimberlite: Implications for the thermal state of the mantle beneath the Slave Craton, Northern Canada. Journal of Petrology, 40(1), 79–104. https://doi.org/10.1093/petroj/40.1.79 Kopylova, M. G., Nowell, G. M., Pearson, D. G., & Markovic, G. (2009). Crystallization of megacrysts from protokimberlitic fluids: Geochemical evidence from high-Cr megacrysts in the Jericho kimberlite. Lithos, 112, 284–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2009.06.008 Lim, E., Giuliani, A., Phillips, D., & Goemann, K. (2018). Origin of complex zoning in olivine from diverse , diamondiferous kimberlites and tectonic settings : Ekati ( Canada ), Alto Paranaiba ( Brazil ) and Kaalvallei ( South Africa ), 112. MacKenzie, J. M., & Canil, D. (1999). Composition and thermal evolution of cratonic mantle beneath the central Archean Slave Province, NWT, Canada. Contributions to Mineralogy 93 and Petrology, 134(4), 313–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004100050487 de Maisonneuve, C. B., Costa, F., Huber, C., Vonlanthen, P., Bachmann, O., & Dungan, M. A. (2016). How do olivines record magmatic events? Insights from major and trace element zoning. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 171(6), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00410-016-1264-6 Majumdar, A. S., Hövelmann, J., Vollmer, C., Berndt, J., Mondal, S. K., & Putnis, A. (2016). Formation of mg-rich olivine pseudomorphs in serpentinized dunite from the Mesoarchean Nuasahi Massif, Eastern India: Insights into the evolution of fluid composition at the mineral-fluid interface. Journal of Petrology, 57(1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/petrology/egv070 Menzies, A., Westerlund, K., Grütter, H., Gurney, J., Carlson, J., Fung, A., & Nowicki, T. (2004). Peridotitic mantle xenoliths from kimberlites on the Ekati Diamond Mine property, N.W.T., Canada: Major element compositions and implications for the lithosphere beneath the central Slave craton. Lithos, 77(1-4 SPEC. ISS.), 395–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2004.04.013 Milman-Barris, M. S., Beckett, J. R., Baker, M. B., Hofmann, A. E., Morgan, Z., Crowley, M. R., et al. (2008). Zoning of phosphorus in igneous olivine. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 155(6), 739–765. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00410-007-0268-7 Mitchell, R. H. (1973). Composition of olivine, silica activity and oxygen fugacity in kimberlite. LITHOS. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-4937(73)90080-7 Mitchell, R. H. (2013). Proceedings of 10th International Kimberlite Conference. Proceedings of 10th International Kimberlite Conference, 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-1170-9 Moore, A., & Costin, G. (2016). Lithos Kimberlitic olivines derived from the Cr-poor and Cr-rich megacryst suites. LITHOS, 258–259, 215–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2016.04.022 Moore, A. E. (1988). Olivine: a monitor of magma evolutionary paths in kimberlites and olivine melilitites. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 99(2), 238–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00371464 Moore, A. E. (2012). The case for a cognate, polybaric origin for kimberlitic olivines. Lithos, 128–131, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2011.11.002 Moore, R. O. (1986). A study of the Kimberlites, Diamonds and Associated Rocks and Minerals from the Monestary Mine, South Africa. Moss, S. W. (2009). Volcanology of the A154N kimberlite at Diavik: implications for eruption dynamics, (September), 254. Moss, S. W., Russell, J. K., Scott Smith, B. H., & Brett, C. (2010). Olivine crystal size distributions in kimberlite. American Mineralogist, 95, 527–536. https://doi.org/10.2138/am.2010.3277 Nielsen, T. F. D., & Sand, K. K. (2008). The Majuagaa kimberlite dike, Maniitsoq region, West Greenland: Constraints on an Mg-rich silicocarbonatitic melt composition from groundmass mineralogy and bulk compositions. Canadian Mineralogist, 46(4), 1043–1061. https://doi.org/10.3749/canmin.46.4.1043 Nowicki, T., Crawford, B., Dyck, D., Carlson, J., McElroy, R., Oshust, P., & Helmstaedt, H. (2004). The geology of kimberlite pipes of the Ekati property, Northwest Territories, Canada. Lithos, 76(1-4 SPEC. ISS.), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2004.03.020 Pilbeam, L. H., Nielsen, T. F. D. D., & Waight, T. E. (2013). Digestion fractional crystallization (DFC): An important process in the genesis of kimberlites. Evidence from olivine in the 94 Majuagaa kimberlite, Southern West Greenland. Journal of Petrology, 54(7), 1399–1425. https://doi.org/10.1093/petrology/egt016 Porritt, L. A., Cas, R. A. F., Schaefer, B., & McKnight, S. W. (2012). Textural analysis of strongly altered kimberlite: Examples from the Ekati diamond mine, Northwest Territories, Canada. Canadian Mineralogist, 50(3), 625–641. https://doi.org/10.3749/canmin.50.3.625 Pouchou, J. L., & Pichoir, F. (1985). PAP f(rZ) procedure for improved quantitative microanalysis. Microbeam Analysis, 104–106. Putnis, A. (2009). Mineral replacement reactions. Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry, 70, 87–124. https://doi.org/10.2138/rmg.2009.70.3 Putnis, A. (2014). Why mineral interfaces matter. Science, 343(6178), 1441–1442. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1250884 Reid, A. M., Donaldson, C. H., Dawson, J. B., Brown, R. W., & Ridley, W. I. (1975). The Igwisi Hills Estrusive “Kimberlites.” In Physics and Chemistry of the Earth (pp. 199–218). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-018017-5.50020-1 Russell, J. K., Porritt, L. A., Lavallé, Y., & Dingwell, D. B. (2012). Kimberlite ascent by assimilation-fuelled buoyancy. Nature, 481(7381), 352–356. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10740 Sazonova, L. V., Nosova, A. A., Kargin, A. V., Borisovskiy, S. E., Tretyachenko, V. V., Abazova, Z. M., & Griban’, Y. G. (2015). Olivine from the Pionerskaya and V. Grib kimberlite pipes, Arkhangelsk diamond province, Russia: Types, composition, and origin. Petrology, 23(3), 227–258. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0869591115030054 Scott Smith, B. H. (2008). Canadian kimberlites: Geological characteristics relevant to emplacement. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 174(1–3), 9–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2007.12.023 Scott Smith, B. H., Nowicki, T. E., Russell, J. K., Webb, K. J., Mitchell, R. H., Hetman, C. M., & Robey, J. vA. (2018). A Glossary of Kimberlite and Related Terms. North Vancouver, BC, Canada: Scott-Smith Petrology Inc. Shaikh, A. M., Tappe, S., Bussweiler, Y., Vollmer, C., & Brown, R. J. (2021). Origins of olivine in Earth’s youngest kimberlite: Igwisi Hills volcanoes, Tanzania craton. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 176(8), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00410-021-01816-2 Soltys, A., Giuliani, A., Phillips, D., Kamenetsky, V. S., Maas, R., Woodhead, J., & Rodemann, T. (2016). In-situ assimilation of mantle minerals by kimberlitic magmas - Direct evidence from a garnet wehrlite xenolith entrained in the Bultfontein kimberlite (Kimberley, South Africa). Lithos, 256–257, 182–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2016.04.011 Soltys, A., Giuliani, A., & Phillips, D. (2018). Crystallisation sequence and magma evolution of the De Beers dyke (Kimberley, South Africa). Mineralogy and Petrology, 112(January 2019), 503–518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00710-018-0588-5 Soltys, A., Giuliani, A., Phillips, D., & Kamenetsky, V. S. (2020). Kimberlite Metasomatism of the Lithosphere and the Evolution of Olivine in Carbonate-rich Melts - Evidence from the Kimberley Kimberlites (South Africa). Journal of Petrology, 61(6), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1093/petrology/egaa062 Sparks, R. S. J., Baker, L., Brown, R. J., Field, M., Schumacher, J., Stripp, G., & Walters, A. (2006). Dynamical constraints on kimberlite volcanism. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 155(1–2), 18–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2006.02.010 Spruzeniece, L., Piazolo, S., & Maynard-Casely, H. E. (2017). Deformation-resembling 95 microstructure created by fluid-mediated dissolution-precipitation reactions. Nature Communications, 8, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14032 Stasiuk, L. D., Sweet, A. R., Issler, D. R., Kivi, K., Lockhart, G. D., & Dyck, D. R. (2003). Pre- and post-kimberlite emplacement thermal history of Cretaceous and Tertiary sediments, Lac de Gras, Northwest Territories, Canada. In 8th International Kimberlite Conference Long Abstrac (pp. 1–5). https://doi.org/10.29173/ikc3014 van Straaten, B. I. (2010). the Eruption of Kimberlite : Insights From the Victor North Kimberlite Pipes , Northern Ontario ,. The University of British Columbia. van Straaten, B. I., & Kopylova, M. G. (2013). Pyroclastic kimberlite deposits from the Victor Northwest pipe (Ontario, Canada): The transition from phreatomagmatic to magmatic explosivity. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 50(10), 1059–1068. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjes-2013-0028 Streck, M. J. (2008). Mineral textures and zoning as evidence for open system processes. Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry, 69(1983), 595–622. https://doi.org/10.2138/rmg.2008.69.15 Tovey, M., Giuliani, A., Phillips, D., & Moss, S. (2020). Controls on the explosive emplacement of diamondiferous kimberlites: New insights from hypabyssal and pyroclastic units in the Diavik mine, Canada. Lithos, 360–361, 105410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2020.105410 Tovey, M., Giuliani, A., Phillips, D., Pearson, D. G., Sarkar, C., Nowicki, T., & Carlson, J. (2021). The spatial and temporal evolution of primitive melt compositions within the Lac de Gras kimberlite field, Canada: Source evolution vs lithospheric mantle assimilation. Lithos, 392–393, 106142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2021.106142 Tsuchiyama, A. (1985). Dissolution kinetics of plagioclase in the melt of the system diopside-albite-anorthite, and origin of dusty plagioclase in andesites. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 89(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01177585 Webb, K., Crawford, B., Nowicki, T., Hetman, C., & Carlson, J. (2008). Coherent kimberlite at EKATI , Northwest Territories , Canada : textural and geochemical variations and implications for emplacement, (9), 1–3. Wilson, L., Iii, J. W. H., & Head, J. W. (2007). An integrated model of kimberlite ascent and eruption. Nature, 447(7140), 53–57. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05692 96 Appendix A: Partial NQ drill core LDC-01 (16.9m-267.44m) Drill core boxes are 1.5m long. The top left is the top of the drill core. Sample locations used in this investigation are drawn in red boxes and sample depths are adjacent. Samples analyzed in this investigation are drawn in yellow boxes. LDC-01 Box 1-5 23.00m Box 1: 16.9? -22.35 Box 2: 22.35-28.51m Box 3: 28.5-33.9m Box 4: 33.91-39.73m Box 5: 39.73-45.6?m 35.72m 97 Appendix A (cont.): LDC-01 Box 6-10 Box 6: 45.6?-51.48m Box 7: 51.48-57.32m Box 8: 57.32-63.09m Box 9: 63.09-68.76m Box 10: 68.76-74.86m 47.60m 68.05m 72.52m 98 Appendix A (cont.): LDC-01 Box 11-15 Box 11: 74.86-80.38m Box 12: 80.38-86.08m Box 13: 86.08-91.80m Box 14: 91.80-97.79m Box 15: 97.79-103.61m 89.67m 98.06m 99 Appendix A (cont.): LDC-01 Box 16-20 Box 16: 103.61-104.56m Box 17: 109.56-115.55m Box 18: 115.35-121.25m Box 19: 121.25-127.31m Box 20: 127.31-133.20m 115.88m 130.87m 100 Appendix A (cont.): LDC-01 Box 21-25 Box 21: 133.20-138.98m Box 22: 138.98-144.94m Box 23: 144.94-150.83m Box 24: 150.83-156.71m Box 29: 178.89-185.77m 140.79m 182.74m 101 Appendix A (cont.): LDC-01 Box 26-30 Box 34: 208.96-214.77m Box 35: 214.77-220.5m Box 37: 226.73-232.13m Box 38: 232.13-237.89m Box 39: 237.89-242.82m 211.50m 226.94m 235.91m 102 Appendix A (cont.): LDC-01 Box 31-35 Box 40: 243.83-249.76m Box 42: 255.?-261.54m Box 43: 261.54-267.44m 255.88m 265.22m 103 Appendix A (cont.): Full NQ drill core LDC-04 (19.51m-317.75m). Drill core boxes are 1.5m long. The top left is the top of the drill core. Sample locations used in this investigation are drawn in red boxes and sample depths are adjacent. Samples analyzed in this investigation are drawn in yellow boxes. LDC-04 Box 1-5 36.2m Box 1: 19.51 -24.94 Box 2: 24.94-30.93m Box 3: 30.93-37.03m Box 4: 37.03-43.12m Box 5: 43.12-48.?m 104 Appendix A (cont.): LDC-04 Box 6-10 57.1m Box 6: 48.?- ~56.?m Box 7: ~56.?- 61.03m Box 8: 61.03-67.04m Box 9: 67.04-72.09m Box 10: 72.09-78.65m 105 Appendix A (cont.): LDC-04 Box 11-15 89.4m Box 11: 78.65-84.55m Box 12: 84.55-90.5m Box 13: 90.5-96.35m Box 14: 96.35-102.14m Box 15: 102.14-107.99m 106 Appendix A (cont.): LDC-04 Box 16-20 108.2m 111.2m Box 16: 107.99-113.85m Box 17: 113.85-119.67m Box 18: 119.67-125.45m Box 19: 125.45-131.32m Box 20: 131.32-137.11m 107 Appendix A (cont.): LDC-04 Box 21-25 138.6m 161.9m Box 21: 137.11-142.90m Box 22: 142.90-148.3m Box 23: 148.3-154.97m Box 24: 154.97-161.49m Box 25: 161.49-166.9m 108 Appendix A (cont.): LDC-04 Box 26-30 176.7m 189.5m 192.8m Box 26: 166.9-172.92m Box 27: 172.92-178.78m Box 28: 178.78-184.72m Box 29: 184.72-190.71m Box 30: 190.71-196.9m 109 Appendix A (cont.): LDC-04 Box 31-35 214.1m 228.3m Box 31: 196.9-202.73m Box 32: 202.3-211.86m Box 33: 211.86-217.74m Box 34: 217.74-223.63m Box 35: 223.63-229.30m 110 Appendix A (cont.): LDC-04 Box 36-40 251.9m Box 36: 229.30-235.55m Box 37: 235.55-241.52m Box 38: 241.52-247.17m Box 39: 247.17-252.91m Box 40: 252.91-258.86m 111 Appendix A (cont.): LDC-04 Box 41-45 285.7m Box 41: 258.86-264.69m Box 42: 264.69-270.45m Box 43: 270.45-276.01m Box 44: 276.01-282.01m Box 45: 282.01-288.09m 112 Appendix A (cont.): LDC-04 Box 46-50 307.0m Box 46: 288.09-293.92m Box 47: 293.92-299.92m Box 48: 299.92-305.8m Box 49: 305.8-311.81m Box 50: 311.81-317.75m 113 Appendix B: Leslie Hand Sample and Slab Images from LDC-01, LDC-03, LDC-04, LDC-07, and LDC-09 LDC-01 Slabs. 114 Appendix B (cont.): LDC-01(cont.) Slabs. 115 Appendix B (cont.): LDC-03 Slabs. 116 Appendix B (cont.): LDC-04 Drill core hand samples. 117 Appendix B (cont.): LDC-04 (cont.) Drill core hand samples 118 Appendix B (cont.): LDC-07 Drill core hand samples and slabs. 119 Appendix B (cont.): LDC-07 (cont.) Drill core hand samples and slabs. 120 Appendix B (cont.): LDC-07 (cont.) Drill core hand samples and slabs. 121 Appendix B (cont.): LDC-09 Drill core hand samples, cracked drill core, and slabs. 122 Appendix C: Petrography Petrographic descriptions of all Leslie thin sections. Full thin section transmitted light (TL) photographs of thin sections (TS) and polished thin sections (PTS) with groundmass photomicrographs in plane polarized light. LDC-03-270m Overall: High proportion of broken olivine. Country Rock Xenoliths: Present. Mantle Xenoliths: Dunite microxenoliths present. Olivine Macrocrysts: Maximum size 8 mm. Fresh with minor dark alteration relating to cracks that are sub-parallel within (~15 degrees to the long axis) and between grains. No serpentine, very fresh and no monticellite rims. Grains show undulose extinction. Garnet inclusions are fresh when internal but brown when in contact with groundmass. Many broken grains. Possible lower abundance than other samples. Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Present with brown rims. Garnet Macrocrysts: Some have thick brown rims. A few very dark brown pseudomorphs are probably garnet macrocrysts. 123 Oxide Macrocrysts: Olivine phenocrysts: Common with typical simple euhedral shapes. Fresh with no alteration. Groundmass: Spinel are common and have a uniform distribution throughout. Spinel can have opaque cores, atoll-like textures and translucent rims. Fresh monticellite throughout. Poikilitic plates of colorless phlogopite enclosing spinel and monticellite grains. Interstitial carbonate and serpentine. The carbonate has a uniform distribution. Perovskite not apparent 124 LDC-03-445m Overall: Completely different from ALL other Leslie samples. It has an overall brown color. Olivine macrocryst dominated. Very little fine-grained material. Slightly altered. No crystalline groundmass. Country Rock Xenoliths: Very small, brown-black, and probably shale. Shale molds around other components of this rock (implying it may be soft). One small altered possible basement granitoid xenoliths with altered biotite, two others with fresh biotite. Mantle Xenoliths: Two possible olivine, pyroxene, oxide with alteration halo. Olivine Macrocrysts: Common up to 5 mm with an overall smaller size range than other samples. Fresh with some internal crack serpentinization. Intergrown with OPX(?) and spinel. Most olivine macrocrysts and smaller and discrete (pyrocrysts?). Some have undulose extinction. Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Garnet Macrocrysts: Altered to brown. Several angular, broken where probable broken faces do not have any brown alteration rim. Oxide Macrocrysts: One small, opaque, broken grain. Olivine phenocrysts: Very low proportion relative to olivine macrocrysts and to other samples. Completely altered. Not a uniform distribution. Most commonly found in magmaclasts and mixed in with shale xenoliths. Magmaclast: A number are present with more fine olivine phenocrysts and very fine groundmass. Possible monticellite. A different type of potential magmaclast are pale brown, ameboid – low confidence, convoluted. Matrix: Interclast matrix is brown and non-crystalline. 125 LDC-04-111.17m Overall: This sample has the most altered/replaced olivines of the three samples from hole LDC-04. LDC-04-111.17m has a darker groundmass with more opaque-brown minerals. Olivine edges and cracks are mildly replaced. From the LDC-04 thin sections, grains are most broken in this sample. Nearly grain supported with very little proportion of groundmass. Country Rock Xenoliths: Minor and minor reaction halos. Mantle Xenoliths: Dunite nodules are less common in LDC-04-111.17m than LDC-04-198.82m and LDC-04-285.71m. No other mantle xenoliths obvious. Olivine Macrocrysts: Maximum size is 13 mm, typically 5-6mm. Minor alteration along internal cracks and FeO along edges and cracks. Olma can have cr-di inclusions. Olma have thin rims which have low first order birefringence that are monticellite coronas. Overall monticellite coronas appear to lack groundmass inclusions. They can appear as granular, or a continuous crystal. Some olma have undulose extinction. Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Maximum size is 9 mm with fresh core and a thick medium brown reaction rim. Garnet Macrocrysts: Maximum size is 2 mm with brown reaction rims. Oxide Macrocrysts: 126 Olivine phenocrysts: Abundant and mainly less than 0.5mm. Monticellite rims are of same thickness as macrocrysts, preserving original euhedral olivine shape. Olivine rim serpentinized prior to monticellite overgrowth (?). Groundmass: The groundmass of this sample has a higher concentration of translucent-brown that are smaller than spinel. Spinel often have atoll textures where the coronas appear to comprise the same material as the translucent-brown mineral described above. Interstitial, blobby carbonate. Large, poikilitic colorless laths of phlogopite enclosing spinel and translucent-brown mineral, (and olph?). Apatite present. Monticellite and perovskite not apparent. 127 LDC-04-198.82m Overall: Grain supported, low % groundmass. Olivine less serprentinized than above. Country Rock Xenoliths: 2 cm angular with green core and whitish rim. Mantle Xenoliths: Dunite nodules present. No other mantle xenoliths obvious. Olivine Macrocrysts: Maximum size is 22 mm. Olma can have cr-di inclusions. Olma can have undulose extinction. Occasionally broken, not often. Monticellite coronas. Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Garnet Macrocrysts: Maximum size 5 mm. Grtma have fresh cores and brown rims. Oxide Macrocrysts: Olivine phenocrysts: Same as above. Monticellite coronas. Groundmass: Spinel is finer grained than above some with coronas that are translucent. Less (or none) discrete translucent brown mineral described above. Monticellite difficult to discern but present. Large, colorless phologite poikilitic stubby laths (enclosing olph, spinel with no atoll, and monticellite). Carbonate and coarse grained apatite present. Minor yellow-brown mineral present (FeO?). 128 LDC-04-285.71m Overall: Same as above and potentially coarser grained than above. Fresh olivine as above. Not many broken macrocrysts. Country Rock Xenoliths: Mantle Xenoliths: Some dunite nodules. A small mico-xenolith of peridotite. Olivine Macrocrysts: Maximum size 20 mm, but most less than 10 mm. Possible alignment in slab showing elongate grains parallel. Parallel internal cracks filled with a black material between grains. Probable garnet and cpx inclusions – brown reaction where in contact with groundmass. Parallel and perpendicular cracks present but not altered. Undulose extinction in some grains. Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Small, with brown reaction rims. Garnet Macrocrysts: Fresh cores, brown rims. Burgundy and purple. Fresher than sample above. Oxide Macrocrysts: Olivine phenocrysts: Same as above. Well preserved. 129 Groundmass: Overall, similar to above. Spinel size same as above but less atoll development than above. Monticellite, phlogopite, carbonate, and apatite as above. Small brown translucent mineral present. 130 LDC-07-52.3m Overall: Similar to LDC-04 samples. A few white veins. In slab these white veins are present and do affect the rock immediately adjacent. Grain-supported, low proportion of groundmass. Country Rock Xenoliths: one 12mm altered example in the slab. Mantle Xenoliths: Dunite nodules rare, but present. Olivine Macrocrysts: Abundant, maximum size up to 17 mm but usually less than 10 mm. Chrome diopside inclusions are fresh when internal and have a brown reaction rim when in contact with the kimberlite. Undulose extinction. The grains are very fresh with minor serpentine alteration along some internal cracks. The grain edges are more complex. The same serpentine as in the cracks appears to have replaced the edge of the olivine macrocryst in many but not all parts. The serpentine edge is then overgrown by fresh monticellite which can occur as single grains as found in the gm or as a more continuous overgrowth within which single grains are not apparent. These rims are extremely similar to those observed in all LDC-4 except that in LDC-04 olivine is less serpentinized. Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Possible pseudomorph after chrome diopside. 131 Garnet Macrocrysts: One up to 12mm purple garnet is mostly fresh with thin brown rim and has smaller olivine intergrown. Most other garnets are probably completely psuedomorphed to dark brown. Oxide Macrocrysts: Olivine phenocrysts: Common but are partly replaced by serpentine and have the same fresh monticellite rims as described above for olivine macrocrysts. Groundmass: Spinel have a uniform distribution throughout the groundmass. The spinel have opaque cores, atoll-like textures are present with translucent rims. Monticellite in groundmass is inconclusive because thick monticellite rims on olivine phenocrysts could appear as a primary monticellite groundmass mineral. Poikilitic laths-plates of phlogopite are present. Interstitial serpentine and carbonate are present. No obvious perovskite. 132 LDC-07-70.1m Overall: Olivine grain supported with minor % of groundmass. Country Rock Xenoliths: Mantle Xenoliths: 4.5 cm mantle xenolith. Olivine Macrocrysts: Slabs show non-uniform size distribution. Max size up to 12 mm, most are < 5mm. Small amounts of serpentine along internal cracks and along the outside of grains. Some grains have undulose extinction. Several small garnet inclusions. Intergrown garnet has thin brown rims in contact with olivine and thicker in contact with the groundmass. One 12 mm grain is intergrown with pale green macro and has pale brown reaction rim against kimberlite. Other olivine have inclusions or are intergrown with fresh Cr-di that has no reaction rims. Broken grains not apparent so far. Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Brown reaction rims Garnet Macrocrysts: Common with variable amounts of brown rims and fresh cores. Oxide Macrocrysts: Rare very small oxides (spinel?) here and above. Olivine phenocrysts: Very fine grained and <1mm. Same thin serpentine edges with only fresh cores remaining. 133 Groundmass: Appears uniform and very fine-grained. Uniform very fine spinel, possibly perovskite and seemingly fresh monticellite. No carbonate but may be interstitial serpentine. 134 LDC-07-151.3m Overall: Quite similar to slab and thin section from 70.1m. Most features stay same but here ol size distribution uniform. Minor % groundmass. Country Rock Xenoliths: Mantle Xenoliths: One small altered. Olivine Macrocrysts: A few 12mm. Typical internal racks but not much serpentinization. Outer rims have thin replacement. Fresh chrome diopside and garnet inclusions. Garnet at edge exposed to groundmass is brown. Occasionally broken. Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Garnet Macrocrysts: Mainly brown with a few fresh cores. Oxide Macrocrysts: Olivine phenocrysts: Abundant euhedral olivine phenocrysts <1mm with replaced edges. Groundmass: Very fine-grained. Abundant spinel-like grains that appear to be atoll but with poorly developed cores. Possibly minor brown perovskite. Minor interstitial colorless phlogopite. Interstitial serpentine. Minor fine irregular patches of crb. Very fine brown equant pseudomorphs could be after monticellite. Monticellite is not obvious. 135 LDC-07-234.0mA Overall: Similar to above. Slightly higher % groundmass. Olivine is fresher. Country Rock Xenoliths: Mantle Xenoliths: Olivine Macrocrysts: Similar to above, fresher. Chrome-diopside and garnet inclusions. Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Similar to above. Garnet Macrocrysts: Similar to above. Oxide Macrocrysts: Olivine phenocrysts: Common and euhedral with thin serpentine edges. Groundmass: Higher % groundmass abundance than above. Well-formed spinel and fresh very fine monticellite. Poikilitic colorless phlogopite (relatively course). Interstitial poikilitic relatively coarse carbonate. Possible serpentine. No obvious perovskite. 136 LDC-07-304.9m Overall: Country Rock Xenoliths: 2cm whitish with minor pale green granitoid basement xenolith which contains common very dark biotite. Mantle Xenoliths: Olivine Macrocrysts: Maximum size: 7mm. Less abundant than most samples above. Minor serpentine at edges. One grain has three small garnets with little or no brown rim even against kimberlite. Cr-di inclusions not obvious. One spl inclusion. Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Occasionally up to 7mm with no rim. Quite fresh. Garnet Macrocrysts: No brown rims, completely fresh. Oxide Macrocrysts: Olivine phenocrysts: Common. Serpentine along edges. Groundmass: Olivine grains are more commonly fragmented and angular is this sample. Monticellite rims are absent, but some rims and cracks are altered. Olivine chemical zoning is present, but less pronounced in SEM images throughout this sample. 137 LDC-09-68.20m Overall: Minimal alteration. Less abundant olma than in LDC-04 samples. Country Rock Xenoliths: Mantle Xenoliths: Dunite nodules present. Olivine Macrocrysts: Very fresh but have FeO edges. Minor serpentine along internal cracks. Garnet inclusions, chrome diopside intergrown. Undulose extinction common. Broken often. Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Present, brown rims. Garnet Macrocrysts: Present with fresh cores and brown rims. Oxide Macrocrysts: Olivine phenocrysts: FeO on edges. Groundmass: Uniform very fine-grained spinel sometimes with atoll textures. Brown-translucent minerals (same as the material that is the corona around spinel). Fresh, fine abundant monticellite. Poikilitic colorless phlogopite, serpentine, and patches of carbonate. Possible perovskite. 138 LDC-09-89.9m Overall: All similar to above. Country Rock Xenoliths: Mantle Xenoliths: Olivine Macrocrysts: Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Garnet Macrocrysts: Oxide Macrocrysts: Olivine phenocrysts: Groundmass: 139 LDC-09-168.8m Overall: Country Rock Xenoliths: White and green, both with reaction halos. Mantle Xenoliths: Peridotite micro-xenolith present. Dunite nodules present. Olivine Macrocrysts: Olivine is very fresh. Maximum size 10mm. More abundant than above, but maybe not as many large olmas. Chrome diopside and garnet inclusions, when in contact with groundmass have brown reaction rim. Undulose extinction common. Occasionally broken. Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Fresh cores with brown reaction rim. Garnet Macrocrysts: Present with thin brown rims and partly fresh cores. Oxide Macrocrysts: One in 3mm in size. Not common. Olivine phenocrysts: Most less than 0.5 mm, up to 1 mm. Very fresh. Groundmass: Slightly coarser than above. Very very fine monticellite and spinel with uniform distribution throughout groundmass. Spinels have opaque and/or dark brown core with atoll textures where the rims are translucent (as observed above). Carbonate is relatively common and occurs interstitially poikilitically enclosing other gm minerals and thus appears to be primary. However, the carbonate distribution is patchy. The patches are sometimes equant but 140 some have a more elongate vein-like distribution. Also, the carbonate appears commonly (but not exclusively) to occur on the same side of olma. Interstitial serpentine. Apatite laths (and basal sections) are present and relatively coarse. Colorless poikilitic phlogopite laths present as above. 141 LDC-09-234.12m Overall: This sample (and last two hand samples) are all similar, but different from the main kimberlite in small olivine size distribution. Olma look different in slab. In thin section, olivine partial replacement by a grey material. Texture and nature of groundmass is very different from the rest of the kimberlite. Colored phlogopite macrocrysts present and not often observed in other samples. Country Rock Xenoliths: One 25mm, one 30mm, and one smaller slender white-green with dark biotite crx which have sub-parallel alignment parallel to short axis of core. One 35mm ovoid. In slab one of the slender crx has a reasonably conspicuous reaction halo of 5+mm that has a light to medium green colour that contrasts with the main gm. The crx is granitoid composed of white and green minerals (possibly pseud) as well as fresh dark biotite. Mantle Xenoliths: Olivine Macrocrysts: Slightly less abundant and smaller than the rest of the main kimberlite. Olma >2-3 mm not often observed up to 7mm. The coarser grains appear to be concentrated in a poorly defined area or even layer that is ?50 deg to long axis. One grt inclusion observed but no Cr-di. Olma are distinctive because of replacement by serpentine-like material that has a 142 particular grey colour and texture. This replacement occurs along certain but not all internal cracks and some edges. Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Present, overall smaller and no reaction rims. Garnet Macrocrysts: Present. Some with brown reaction rims and some without. Intergrown with olivine and probable chrome diopside. Oxide Macrocrysts: Olivine phenocrysts: Abundant. (cont.) Groundmass: Higher proportion of groundmass and completely different compared to other samples. Very dark grey groundmass with small irregular pale green segregations throughout. Uniform distribution of fine segregations (serpentine along edges and carbonate in center). The most conspicuous component are pseudomorphs of probable monticellite. The interstitial groundmass is messy with common opaque material. Spinel is present. 143 LDC-01-140.79m Overall: Many broken olivine. Country Rock Xenoliths: Few up to 15mm which are completely replaced by pale green materials and have haloes 3mm wide. Mantle Xenoliths: Coarse-grained garnet peridotite xenolith. Olivine Macrocrysts: Maximum size 6 mm. Non-uniform. One has completely enclosed garnet inclusion with no alteration. Undulose extinction and deformation lamelaepresent. Fresh. One has an OPX inclusion and in slab some have chrome diopside inclusions. Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Typical brown alteration with fresh core. Garnet Macrocrysts: Typical brown alteration. Oxide Macrocrysts: One small, intergrown with probable pseudomorph of chrome diospides, and is thus, likely a spinel. Olivine phenocrysts: Typical euhedral shapes. Common. Fresh. Groundmass: Spinel is finer-grained than in LDC-01-226.9m. Poorly developed atoll textures. Spinel>>perovskite. Monticellite present. Interstitial and poikilitic carbonate. 144 LDC-01-226.94m Overall: Low % groundmass. Many broken olivine. Similar to above. Country Rock Xenoliths: Mantle Xenoliths: Olivine Macrocrysts: Maximum size 7mm. Many broken. One has chrome diopside inclusion. One with undulose extinction. Fresh. Chrome Diopside Macrocrysts: Present and rims altered to brown. Garnet Macrocrysts: Present and rims altered to brown. Oxide Macrocrysts: Olivine phenocrysts: Typical euhedral olivine phenocrysts. Fresh. Groundmass: Coarser grained than other samples. Spinel-rich with atoll-like texture. Poikilitic colorless phlogopite, monticellite. No apparent perovskite. 145 Appendix D: Electron Microprobe Analyses Table D.1: Electron Microprobe (EMP) major and minor element analyses in wt % of Leslie olivine from drill hole LDC-09 2σ 1 LODmin2 LODlim3 Sample LDC-09-68.20mA Label4 c1-1 c1-2 c1-3 c1-4 c2-1 c2-2 c2-3 c2-4 c3-1 c3-2 c3-3 c4-1 c4-2 Zone5 C C M R C C M R C C R C R Type6 P P P P P P P P P P P P P SiO2 0.42 0.13 0.39 41.13 40.95 40.52 41.30 41.25 41.24 40.15 41.16 40.40 40.56 40.75 40.30 40.80 TiO2 0.01 0.03 0.11 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.02 FeO 0.25 0.11 0.33 6.98 7.06 9.33 7.31 7.08 7.04 10.26 7.94 7.75 7.63 8.02 9.07 8.35 NiO 0.05 0.08 0.24 0.32 0.35 0.29 0.17 0.36 0.37 0.24 0.15 0.43 0.35 0.17 0.34 0.38 MnO 0.04 0.07 0.22 0.11 0.10 0.16 0.18 0.09 0.12 0.17 0.11 0.10 0.13 0.07 0.12 0.11 MgO 0.50 0.10 0.30 51.79 51.71 49.85 51.64 51.80 51.25 49.12 51.16 50.96 50.69 50.69 50.32 50.80 CaO 0.02 0.03 0.09 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.04 Wt Sum7 100.35 100.18 100.20 100.84 100.58 100.03 100.01 100.60 99.67 99.43 99.79 100.22 100.49 Cation Total.8 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo #9 92.97 92.88 90.50 92.65 92.88 92.84 89.51 91.99 92.14 92.22 91.84 90.82 91.55 1 Analytical uncertainty as 2σ 2 Limit of detection 2σ above background count for all analyses from LDC-09 3 Limit of detection 6σ above background count for all analyses from LDC-09 4EMP point: Crystal number – point number 5 Chemical zone: C=Core, M=Mid-Zone, R=Rim, Rd=Rind 6Olivine type: X=Mantle Xenolith, N=Nodule, M=Macrocryst, P=Phenocryst 7 Weight sum of measured oxides 8 Cation totals calculated using 4 oxygens 9 Forsterite number as a mole percent Mg/(Mg+Fe) *100. 146 Table D.1 (cont.) Sample LDC-09-68.20mA Label c4-3 c5-1 c5-2 c5-3 c5-4 c5-5 c5-6 c6-1 c6-2 c6-3 c6-4 c7-1 c7-2 c7-3 c7-4 Zone R C C C C R R C C C C C C C C Type P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P SiO2 40.76 40.71 40.83 41.17 41.19 41.01 40.99 40.51 40.67 40.56 40.51 41.12 40.93 40.71 41.02 TiO2 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 FeO 7.78 7.35 7.25 7.76 7.86 7.75 7.97 7.84 7.79 7.94 7.82 6.63 6.51 6.67 6.54 NiO 0.31 0.28 0.33 0.34 0.42 0.31 0.14 0.41 0.42 0.36 0.38 0.35 0.38 0.34 0.34 MnO 0.10 0.12 0.11 0.08 0.11 0.10 0.16 0.13 0.09 0.10 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.11 MgO 50.78 51.39 51.51 51.21 50.93 51.35 50.64 50.87 50.73 50.75 50.45 52.11 51.73 51.88 51.97 CaO 0.05 0.02 0.03 0.07 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.09 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.03 Wt Sum 99.81 99.87 100.08 100.63 100.58 100.59 99.99 99.80 99.76 99.77 99.40 100.34 99.66 99.72 100.02 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 92.08 92.57 92.68 92.17 92.03 92.20 91.89 92.05 92.07 91.93 92.00 93.34 93.41 93.28 93.41 Sample LDC-09-68.20mA Label c8-1 c8-2 c8-3 c8-5 c8-6 c8-7 c8-8 c8-9 c9-1 c9-2 c9-3 c9-4 c9-5 c9-6 c9-7 Zone C C C C C C R R C C C C C R R Type P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P SiO2 41.00 40.72 40.90 40.82 40.86 40.54 41.14 39.25 40.89 41.11 41.35 41.03 40.63 41.06 41.08 TiO2 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 FeO 7.70 7.38 7.60 7.47 7.61 7.31 7.56 7.15 7.13 7.16 7.36 7.31 7.21 7.93 8.04 NiO 0.37 0.40 0.42 0.44 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.27 0.34 0.34 0.38 0.32 0.34 0.35 0.21 MnO 0.12 0.09 0.14 0.13 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.08 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.12 MgO 50.86 50.93 51.25 51.45 51.16 50.65 51.03 47.92 51.64 52.03 51.65 51.79 51.89 51.50 50.85 CaO 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.18 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.06 Wt Sum 100.09 99.57 100.35 100.34 100.15 99.04 100.31 94.95 100.13 100.76 100.83 100.58 100.21 101.03 100.37 Cation Total 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 Fo # 92.17 92.49 92.32 92.47 92.30 92.51 92.33 92.27 92.81 92.83 92.60 92.66 92.77 92.05 91.85 147 Table D.1 (cont.) Sample LDC-09-68.20mA Label c10-1 c10-2 c10-3 c10-4 c10-5 c11-1 c11-2 c11-3 c11-4 c11-5 c12-1 c12-2 c12-3 -c12-4 -c12-5 Zone C C C C C C C C R R C C C M R Type M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M SiO2 40.94 40.89 40.73 40.54 40.71 40.78 40.46 40.59 41.19 40.86 41.66 41.34 41.01 40.69 40.20 TiO2 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.04 FeO 7.84 7.93 7.53 7.62 7.85 6.94 6.92 6.96 7.74 7.95 6.65 6.63 6.55 9.69 7.80 NiO 0.36 0.33 0.37 0.37 0.35 0.36 0.35 0.36 0.23 0.16 0.40 0.38 0.36 0.23 0.22 MnO 0.11 0.12 0.06 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.05 0.09 0.08 0.16 0.08 0.12 0.08 0.17 0.11 MgO 51.32 51.48 50.92 51.16 50.87 51.04 51.52 51.64 50.74 50.89 52.17 52.46 52.20 49.53 50.38 CaO 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.08 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.21 Wt Sum 100.63 100.81 99.69 99.87 99.99 99.28 99.37 99.70 100.05 100.11 100.98 100.93 100.22 100.39 98.96 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 92.10 92.05 92.34 92.29 92.03 92.92 92.99 92.97 92.11 91.94 93.33 93.38 93.43 90.11 92.01 Sample LDC-09-68.20mA LDC-09-68.20mB Label c13-1 c13-2 c13-3 c13-4 c13-5 c13-6 c13-7 c14-1 c14-2 c14-3 c14-4 c1-1 c1-2 c1-3 c2-1 c2-2 Zone C C C C C C R C C R R C C C C C Type N N N N N N N P P P P X X X M M SiO2 40.69 40.72 40.93 41.35 40.47 40.72 40.71 41.21 41.06 40.87 41.19 41.36 41.09 41.52 40.89 41.17 TiO2 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 FeO 8.51 8.68 8.43 8.49 8.57 8.62 7.87 6.79 6.87 7.95 7.95 6.68 6.54 6.71 6.94 6.89 NiO 0.35 0.41 0.41 0.37 0.41 0.38 0.15 0.37 0.33 0.42 0.21 0.43 0.37 0.39 0.34 0.35 MnO 0.10 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.05 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.08 0.09 0.11 0.08 0.08 MgO 50.19 50.34 50.46 50.63 50.21 50.93 50.99 51.71 52.09 51.16 51.48 51.70 51.71 51.93 51.22 51.73 CaO 0.05 0.04 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 Wt Sum 99.91 100.35 100.43 100.99 99.78 100.84 99.89 100.18 100.48 100.58 101.02 100.27 99.82 100.69 99.49 100.23 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.01 Fo # 91.31 91.18 91.43 91.40 91.26 91.33 92.03 93.14 93.11 91.98 92.03 93.24 93.37 93.24 92.94 93.05 148 Table D.1 (cont.) Sample LDC-09-68.20mB Label c2-3 c2-4 c2-5 c2-6 c2-7 c2-8 c3-1 c3-2 c3-3 c3-4 c3-5 c4-1 c4-2 c4-3 c5-1 c5-2 Zone C C M R R M C C C R R C C R C C Type M M M M M M P P P P P P P P M M SiO2 40.97 41.40 40.93 41.10 41.10 40.41 40.81 41.28 40.78 41.13 40.80 40.58 40.50 40.46 40.58 41.00 TiO2 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 FeO 6.82 6.92 8.82 8.14 7.73 9.65 6.65 6.91 6.79 7.24 7.94 8.35 7.52 7.74 7.16 7.07 NiO 0.40 0.30 0.29 0.39 0.37 0.28 0.32 0.36 0.38 0.34 0.40 0.34 0.42 0.12 0.33 0.34 MnO 0.09 0.08 0.10 0.15 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.11 0.08 0.08 0.11 0.10 0.07 0.12 0.11 0.08 MgO 51.34 51.48 49.78 50.77 50.81 48.75 51.51 51.51 51.44 51.11 50.12 49.82 50.41 50.15 50.93 51.36 CaO 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.00 0.02 Wt Sum 99.64 100.22 100.00 100.62 100.17 99.28 99.43 100.19 99.49 99.93 99.43 99.24 98.99 98.69 99.11 99.88 Cation Total 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 Fo # 93.06 92.99 90.96 91.75 92.13 90.01 93.25 93.00 93.10 92.64 91.84 91.40 92.28 92.03 92.69 92.83 Sample LDC-09-68.20mB Label c5-3 c5-4 c6-1 c6-2 c7-1 c7-2 c8-1 c8-2 c8-3 c9-1 c9-2 c9-3 c10-1 c10-2 c10-3 c10-4 Zone M R C R C R C M R C M R C C M M Type M M P P P P P P P P P P M M M M SiO2 40.68 40.65 40.58 39.90 40.99 40.70 40.59 40.54 40.72 41.33 40.51 40.82 40.60 40.54 40.11 40.03 TiO2 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 FeO 8.13 8.16 9.74 7.90 6.65 7.79 7.98 8.19 8.11 6.91 10.35 8.15 6.68 6.77 10.54 10.51 NiO 0.38 0.14 0.30 0.19 0.42 0.19 0.38 0.37 0.14 0.42 0.28 0.16 0.38 0.35 0.22 0.16 MnO 0.12 0.11 0.13 0.14 0.07 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.14 0.07 0.08 0.17 0.18 MgO 50.23 50.81 49.37 49.40 51.61 50.51 50.44 49.90 50.68 51.46 48.49 50.68 51.06 51.10 48.06 47.90 CaO 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.28 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.07 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 Wt Sum 99.59 99.95 100.18 97.82 99.79 99.36 99.54 99.14 99.86 100.23 99.77 100.04 98.81 98.85 99.15 98.81 Cation Total 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 Fo # 91.68 91.74 90.04 91.77 93.26 92.04 91.85 91.57 91.76 93.00 89.30 91.73 93.16 93.08 89.04 89.04 149 Table D.1 (cont.) Sample LDC-09-68.20mB Label c10-5 c10-6 c11-1 c11-2 c11-3 c11-4 c12-1 c12-2 c12-3 c12-4 c12-5 c12-6 c12-7 c12-8 c12-9 Zone M R C R R R C C R C C C C C C Type M M P P P P N N N N N N N N N SiO2 40.70 40.43 41.05 40.84 40.95 40.59 40.71 40.87 40.51 40.95 40.99 41.00 40.96 40.76 40.51 TiO2 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 FeO 8.98 7.96 7.14 7.93 7.80 7.48 7.52 7.29 7.68 7.56 7.58 7.58 7.58 7.42 7.56 NiO 0.24 0.16 0.35 0.39 0.16 0.15 0.36 0.37 0.15 0.37 0.35 0.38 0.38 0.36 0.36 MnO 0.13 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.13 0.22 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.07 0.10 0.08 0.12 0.12 0.12 MgO 49.22 50.32 51.08 50.06 50.15 50.94 50.18 50.78 50.41 51.21 50.92 50.61 51.42 50.72 50.55 CaO 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.13 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.03 Wt Sum 99.34 99.06 99.77 99.37 99.26 99.57 98.94 99.45 98.93 100.20 100.00 99.70 100.53 99.41 99.16 Cation Total 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 Fo # 90.72 91.85 92.73 91.84 91.98 92.39 92.25 92.55 92.13 92.36 92.29 92.25 92.36 92.41 92.26 Sample LDC-09-89.90mA Label c1-1 c1-2 c1-3 c1-4 c2-1 c2-2 c2-3 c2-4 c2-5 c2-6 c2-7 c2-8 c2-9 c3-1 c3-2 Zone C C C R C C C C C C C C C C C Type P P P P M M M M M M M M M P P SiO2 41.04 41.02 40.86 40.38 40.76 40.54 40.56 40.78 40.98 40.37 40.61 40.49 40.52 41.42 41.16 TiO2 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 FeO 8.10 7.97 7.94 8.01 8.91 8.52 8.66 8.59 8.65 8.78 8.70 8.70 8.67 6.56 6.62 NiO 0.42 0.38 0.38 0.34 0.30 0.34 0.32 0.34 0.32 0.31 0.30 0.33 0.34 0.37 0.38 MnO 0.12 0.14 0.11 0.10 0.19 0.14 0.10 0.13 0.10 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.13 0.09 0.08 MgO 50.91 51.04 50.90 50.44 50.24 50.11 50.41 50.26 50.67 50.28 50.48 50.24 50.58 52.56 52.20 CaO 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.00 Wt Sum 100.63 100.60 100.23 99.34 100.46 99.71 100.11 100.17 100.78 99.98 100.29 100.00 100.33 101.01 100.45 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 91.81 91.95 91.95 91.82 90.96 91.29 91.21 91.25 91.26 91.08 91.18 91.15 91.23 93.46 93.36 150 Table D.1 (cont.) Sample LDC-09-89.90mA Label c3-3 c3-4 c3-5 c4-1 c4-2 c4-3 c4-4 c4-5 c5-1 c5-2 c6-1 c6-2 c6-3 c7-1 c7-2 Zone C C R C C C C C C C C C C C C Type P P P M M M M M P P P P P M M SiO2 41.40 40.71 40.61 40.79 40.77 41.19 41.02 40.79 40.33 40.51 40.97 41.32 40.82 40.92 40.46 TiO2 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 FeO 6.60 6.57 8.33 7.87 7.81 7.79 7.80 7.60 8.36 8.70 7.70 7.76 7.86 8.03 8.29 NiO 0.35 0.37 0.32 0.40 0.43 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.38 0.35 0.38 0.41 0.37 0.38 0.42 MnO 0.08 0.06 0.12 0.11 0.08 0.11 0.09 0.10 0.13 0.14 0.13 0.09 0.09 0.14 0.10 MgO 52.47 51.89 50.27 50.78 50.52 51.10 50.81 51.00 49.94 50.16 51.19 51.25 50.96 50.53 50.81 CaO 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.03 Wt Sum 100.91 99.61 99.74 99.98 99.66 100.62 100.16 99.91 99.19 99.90 100.45 100.89 100.18 100.06 100.11 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 Fo # 93.41 93.37 91.50 92.00 92.02 92.12 92.07 92.28 91.42 91.14 92.21 92.17 92.03 91.81 91.62 Sample LDC-09-89.90mA LDC-09-89.90mB Label c7-3 c7-4 c2-1 c2-2 c2-3 c3-1 c3-2 c3-3 c4-1 c4-2 c4-3 c4-4 c4-5 c5-1 c5-2 Zone C C C M R C C R C C R R R C C Type M M P P P M M M M M M M M P P SiO2 40.86 41.45 40.73 40.23 39.57 40.96 40.52 40.21 40.89 40.92 41.00 40.74 40.35 40.80 40.95 TiO2 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.00 0.01 FeO 8.09 7.97 6.90 9.12 7.94 6.82 6.74 8.01 6.21 6.68 7.36 7.96 8.46 7.61 7.54 NiO 0.42 0.42 0.41 0.19 0.29 0.34 0.37 0.28 0.38 0.36 0.32 0.21 0.09 0.40 0.38 MnO 0.11 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.08 0.13 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.11 0.14 0.09 0.13 MgO 50.46 51.24 50.86 49.50 49.73 51.24 51.01 50.32 52.01 51.67 51.17 49.99 50.07 51.04 50.90 CaO 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.00 0.01 Wt Sum 100.00 101.25 99.05 99.20 97.68 99.47 98.75 98.99 99.70 99.72 99.96 99.06 99.21 99.94 99.92 Cation Total 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.00 Fo # 91.75 91.98 92.93 90.64 91.78 93.06 93.10 91.80 93.73 93.23 92.54 91.80 91.34 92.28 92.33 151 Table D.1 (cont.) Sample LDC-09-89.90mB Label c5-3 c5-4 c1-1 c1-2 c1-3 c1-4 c6-1 c6-2 c6-3 c6-4 c6-5 c6-6 c6-7 c6-8 c6-9 Zone R R C C R R C C C R C C C C R Type P P P P P P M M M M M M M M M SiO2 40.83 40.58 41.16 41.30 40.99 40.87 40.49 41.14 40.76 39.53 40.94 40.90 40.69 40.76 40.59 TiO2 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.00 FeO 8.13 7.95 6.87 7.01 7.93 7.72 6.68 6.61 6.67 7.76 6.54 6.73 6.81 8.29 7.96 NiO 0.40 0.29 0.37 0.40 0.41 0.17 0.38 0.37 0.36 0.39 0.38 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.26 MnO 0.10 0.12 0.12 0.07 0.09 0.16 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.12 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.13 0.10 MgO 50.20 50.32 51.59 51.45 50.99 50.70 51.06 51.31 50.82 49.18 51.53 51.51 51.43 50.13 50.46 CaO 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.31 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.03 Wt Sum 99.70 99.32 100.13 100.24 100.49 99.69 98.67 99.53 98.70 97.34 99.48 99.63 99.39 99.75 99.41 Cation Total 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 Fo # 91.67 91.86 93.05 92.90 91.97 92.13 93.17 93.26 93.14 91.87 93.35 93.17 93.08 91.51 91.87 Sample LDC-09-89.90mB LDC-09-168.8mA Label c6-10 c7-1 c7-2 c7-3 c7-4 c1-1 c1-2 c1-3 c1-4 c1-5 c1-6 c1-7 c2-1 c2-2 c2-3 Zone R C C R R C C M R R Rd C C C C Type M M M M M M M M M M P P P P P SiO2 40.52 40.55 40.35 40.91 40.39 41.26 40.59 40.87 40.58 40.58 41.71 40.34 41.08 41.34 40.85 TiO2 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 FeO 8.12 8.89 9.34 8.31 7.86 7.33 7.11 8.58 8.09 8.20 3.03 8.22 7.02 7.32 7.11 NiO 0.16 0.30 0.31 0.40 0.13 0.36 0.34 0.29 0.25 0.16 0.11 0.15 0.39 0.32 0.37 MnO 0.18 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.13 0.09 0.12 0.14 0.10 0.15 0.34 0.16 0.09 0.09 0.09 MgO 50.23 49.52 49.48 50.58 50.84 51.45 50.76 49.88 50.38 50.62 53.68 50.35 51.43 51.56 51.34 CaO 0.07 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.14 0.01 0.27 0.04 0.03 0.09 1.48 0.07 0.02 0.01 0.01 Wt Sum 99.31 99.38 99.64 100.36 99.49 100.50 99.20 99.82 99.46 99.84 100.37 99.34 100.02 100.64 99.76 Cation Total 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 Fo # 91.68 90.85 90.43 91.56 92.02 92.60 92.72 91.20 91.74 91.67 96.93 91.61 92.89 92.63 92.79 152 Table D.1 (cont.) Sample LDC-09-168.8mA Label c2-4 c2-5 c2-6 c2-7 c2-8 c3-1 c3-2 c3-3 c3-4 c4-1 c4-2 c4-3 c4-4 c4-5 c4-6 Zone C R R R Rd C M R R C C M R C R Type P P P P P P P P P M M M M P P SiO2 40.62 40.98 41.08 40.71 41.93 40.73 40.02 41.12 41.00 41.10 40.88 41.05 41.15 40.20 40.53 TiO2 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.01 FeO 8.56 8.23 8.21 8.36 3.37 7.33 11.21 8.21 8.11 6.65 6.94 8.04 7.87 11.00 7.93 NiO 0.28 0.36 0.31 0.18 0.08 0.35 0.17 0.35 0.25 0.37 0.40 0.39 0.20 0.28 0.18 MnO 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.14 0.37 0.10 0.16 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.13 0.15 0.11 MgO 50.42 50.64 50.66 50.45 53.60 51.37 47.56 50.58 50.79 52.02 51.66 50.47 50.61 48.25 50.21 CaO 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.05 1.54 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.10 0.06 0.04 Wt Sum 100.04 100.36 100.43 99.91 100.93 99.92 99.21 100.47 100.37 100.25 100.01 100.10 100.09 99.99 99.01 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 Fo # 91.31 91.64 91.67 91.49 96.59 92.59 88.32 91.65 91.78 93.31 92.99 91.80 91.97 88.66 91.86 Sample LDC-09-168.8mA Label c5-1 c5-2 c5-3 c6-1 c6-2 c6-3 c6-4 c6-5 c7-1 c7-2 c7-3 c7-4 c7-5 c7-6 c7-7 Zone C R C C C R R Rd C C R C C R R Type P P P P P P P P X X X X X X X SiO2 40.73 41.07 40.71 40.75 40.79 40.35 40.70 40.91 40.42 40.81 40.35 40.85 40.98 40.63 40.28 TiO2 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.02 FeO 8.16 7.95 8.08 7.45 8.06 8.13 6.21 6.22 7.22 7.16 7.83 7.23 7.36 7.98 8.04 NiO 0.33 0.16 0.43 0.43 0.35 0.38 0.08 0.09 0.37 0.33 0.34 0.38 0.36 0.41 0.15 MnO 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.18 0.21 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.14 MgO 50.26 50.77 50.60 51.21 50.24 50.73 51.63 51.44 51.41 51.08 50.25 51.48 51.60 50.56 50.19 CaO 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.23 0.22 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.06 Wt Sum 99.66 100.12 99.99 99.99 99.60 99.74 99.09 99.14 99.54 99.50 98.95 100.05 100.42 99.76 98.88 Cation Total 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 91.66 91.92 91.78 92.45 91.74 91.76 93.68 93.65 92.70 92.71 91.96 92.69 92.59 91.86 91.76 153 Table D.1 (cont.) Sample LDC-09-168.8mA Label c7-8 c7-9 c7-10 c7-11 c7-12 c7-13 c7-14 c7-15 c7-16 c7-17 c7-19 c7-20 c8-1 c8-2 c8-3 Zone C C C R R R C C R R C R C C R Type X X X X X X X X X X X X P P P SiO2 41.05 41.10 40.97 41.13 41.01 40.75 40.37 40.26 40.61 40.71 40.58 40.91 40.40 40.76 39.64 TiO2 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.11 FeO 7.14 7.16 7.47 7.77 7.80 8.29 7.26 7.11 8.32 7.98 7.10 7.93 7.15 8.08 8.43 NiO 0.37 0.36 0.37 0.40 0.36 0.14 0.39 0.38 0.36 0.22 0.40 0.14 0.36 0.28 0.42 MnO 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.12 0.09 0.13 0.07 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.13 0.14 0.11 0.12 0.09 MgO 51.50 51.74 51.70 51.06 51.44 51.07 50.67 51.15 50.17 50.58 51.38 50.88 51.35 50.25 48.75 CaO 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.43 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.04 0.05 Wt Sum 100.18 100.47 100.63 100.54 100.76 100.83 98.78 99.02 99.62 99.62 99.59 100.08 99.40 99.54 97.49 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 Fo # 92.78 92.79 92.50 92.13 92.16 91.65 92.56 92.77 91.49 91.87 92.80 91.96 92.75 91.73 91.16 Sample LDC-09-168.8mA Label c8-4 c8-5 c9-1 c9-2 c9-3 c9-4 c9-5 c9-6 c9-7 c9-8 c9-9 c10-1 c10-2 c10-3 c10-4 Zone R R C C M R R C C R R C C M M Type P P M M M M M P M M M P P P P SiO2 40.74 40.78 41.07 41.00 40.69 40.34 40.61 40.43 41.01 40.97 40.44 41.09 40.18 40.14 39.92 TiO2 0.04 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 FeO 8.17 7.98 6.95 7.15 8.28 8.13 8.22 8.28 7.01 8.54 7.97 6.16 6.20 10.12 11.05 NiO 0.18 0.15 0.36 0.33 0.37 0.43 0.14 0.37 0.35 0.42 0.19 0.39 0.40 0.23 0.20 MnO 0.12 0.15 0.11 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.13 0.10 0.09 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.07 0.14 0.17 MgO 50.43 50.85 51.93 51.46 50.88 50.38 50.53 50.07 51.45 50.03 50.62 51.89 51.71 49.25 48.37 CaO 0.05 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.07 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.07 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 Wt Sum 99.73 100.01 100.43 100.07 100.36 99.45 99.70 99.36 99.97 100.13 99.43 99.64 98.58 99.92 99.77 Cation Total 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 91.67 91.91 93.02 92.77 91.64 91.70 91.64 91.51 92.90 91.26 91.89 93.76 93.70 89.66 88.64 154 Table D.1 (cont.) Sample LDC-09-168.8mA Label c10-5 c10-6 c11-1 c11-2 c11-3 c12-1 c12-2 c12-3 c13-1 c13-2 c13-3 c13-4 c14-1 c14-3 c14-4 Zone R R C R Rd C R Rd C C M R C R C Type P P P P P P P P M M M M M M P SiO2 40.38 40.80 40.34 40.66 41.63 40.80 40.80 41.55 39.88 40.40 39.12 40.64 40.14 41.22 40.50 TiO2 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.00 FeO 7.85 8.12 11.50 8.09 2.89 7.81 8.11 2.74 9.83 9.86 11.51 7.73 8.35 8.44 7.37 NiO 0.34 0.19 0.29 0.24 0.13 0.30 0.24 0.07 0.37 0.34 0.33 0.14 0.43 0.41 0.39 MnO 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.32 0.13 0.12 0.36 0.17 0.13 0.15 0.13 0.15 0.10 0.13 MgO 50.36 50.81 48.20 50.81 54.07 50.85 50.50 53.43 49.02 49.08 46.88 51.05 49.90 50.43 50.95 CaO 0.04 0.08 0.03 0.04 1.51 0.03 0.04 1.56 0.01 0.02 0.50 0.15 0.05 0.04 0.02 Wt Sum 99.11 100.16 100.52 100.00 100.54 99.94 99.83 99.73 99.29 99.84 98.52 99.87 99.02 100.66 99.35 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 Fo # 91.96 91.78 88.20 91.80 97.09 92.07 91.73 97.20 89.89 89.87 87.89 92.17 91.41 91.42 92.50 Sample LDC-09-168.8mA Label c14-5 c14-6 c15-1 c15-2 c15-3 c15-4 c15-5 c15-6 c15-7 c15-8 c15-9 c16-1 c16-2 c16-3 c16-4 Zone M R C M R Rd Rd Rd C C R C C C C Type P P M M M M M M M M M N N N N SiO2 39.60 40.07 40.73 40.34 40.90 41.52 41.84 41.04 40.88 40.74 40.85 40.37 40.49 40.90 40.49 TiO2 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.01 FeO 11.00 8.08 7.88 8.52 8.22 1.94 2.05 2.31 8.12 8.08 8.22 8.95 8.54 8.12 8.18 NiO 0.27 0.14 0.36 0.36 0.17 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.36 0.24 0.15 0.38 0.39 0.32 0.39 MnO 0.14 0.13 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.16 0.19 0.18 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.09 0.11 0.10 MgO 47.82 50.24 50.76 50.58 51.27 55.93 56.11 55.48 50.61 51.13 51.19 50.05 50.20 50.94 50.59 CaO 0.02 0.06 0.02 0.04 0.08 0.40 0.48 0.48 0.02 0.05 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 Wt Sum 98.88 98.73 99.89 100.02 100.78 99.98 100.71 99.50 100.13 100.38 100.63 99.95 99.78 100.48 99.83 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 88.57 91.73 91.99 91.36 91.75 98.09 97.99 97.72 91.74 91.86 91.74 90.88 91.29 91.80 91.68 155 Table D.1 (cont.) Sample LDC-09-168.8mA Label c16-5 c16-6 c16-7 c16-8 c16-9 c16-10 Zone C C C C C C Type N N N N P P SiO2 40.63 40.66 40.37 40.11 40.48 40.73 TiO2 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.03 FeO 8.17 8.17 8.30 8.70 8.37 8.03 NiO 0.36 0.45 0.44 0.39 0.40 0.37 MnO 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.14 0.14 MgO 49.98 50.13 50.20 49.69 50.60 50.68 CaO 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.06 Wt Sum 99.30 99.57 99.48 99.08 100.04 100.03 Cation Total 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 91.60 91.62 91.51 91.06 91.51 91.84 156 Table D.2: Electron Microprobe (EMP) major and minor element analyses in wt % of Leslie olivine from drill hole LDC-07. 2σ LODmin LODlim Sample LDC-07-234.0mA Label c1-1 c1-2 c1-3 c1-4 c1-5 c1-6 c2-1 c2-2 c2-3 c2-4 c2-5 c2-6 Zone C C C C Rd Rd C C C C R Rd Type P P P P P P P P P P P P SiO2 0.42 0.13 0.39 40.73 40.79 40.40 41.04 42.03 41.26 40.53 40.54 40.86 41.26 40.81 39.32 TiO2 0.01 0.04 0.11 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.06 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.20 FeO 0.25 0.11 0.34 8.49 8.35 7.97 7.96 2.71 3.44 9.64 9.05 8.20 7.98 7.81 5.25 NiO 0.05 0.08 0.24 0.39 0.43 0.45 0.32 0.10 0.10 0.30 0.34 0.37 0.44 0.30 0.02 MnO 0.04 0.07 0.22 0.10 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.15 0.30 0.13 0.13 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.22 MgO 0.50 0.10 0.30 50.04 50.16 50.07 49.47 55.21 53.01 49.34 49.44 50.48 50.90 50.01 53.03 CaO 0.02 0.03 0.09 0.05 0.02 0.06 0.19 0.19 1.31 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.38 Wt Sum 99.82 99.87 99.08 99.10 100.41 99.48 99.99 99.60 100.05 100.75 99.13 98.41 Cation Total 3.00 3.00 3.01 2.99 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.03 Fo # 91.31 91.46 91.80 91.72 97.32 96.49 90.12 90.69 91.65 91.91 91.94 94.74 Sample LDC-07-234.0mA Label c3-1 c3-2 c3-3 c3-4 c3-5 c3-6 c3-7 c3-8 c4-1 c4-2 c4-3 c4-4 c4-5 c5-1 c5-2 Zone C C C C C C C C C C C C R C C Type N N N N N N N N P P P P P P P SiO2 40.88 40.57 40.65 40.79 40.61 40.49 40.94 40.45 40.68 38.40 40.84 40.73 40.03 41.26 41.07 TiO2 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 FeO 9.09 9.27 8.98 9.33 8.93 8.95 8.93 8.84 8.48 8.11 8.41 8.32 7.86 6.45 6.62 NiO 0.35 0.36 0.31 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.35 0.34 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.38 0.20 0.36 0.33 MnO 0.11 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.14 0.09 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.10 0.10 MgO 49.74 49.72 49.88 49.61 49.23 49.72 49.54 49.79 50.15 48.14 50.35 50.34 49.72 52.49 52.05 CaO 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.08 0.04 1.55 0.03 0.04 0.08 0.02 0.02 Wt Sum 100.23 100.09 100.03 100.24 99.31 99.65 99.92 99.68 99.84 96.71 100.16 99.93 98.03 100.67 100.18 Cation Total 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 90.70 90.54 90.83 90.45 90.76 90.83 90.82 90.94 91.33 91.37 91.43 91.51 91.85 93.55 93.34 157 Table D.2 (cont.) Sample LDC-07-234.0mA Label c5-3 c5-4 c5-5 c5-6 c6-1 c6-2 c6-3 c6-4 c6-5 c6-6 c6-7 c7-1 c7-2 c7-3 c7-4 Zone C R R Rd C C C C M R Rd C C M M Type P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P SiO2 41.20 40.66 40.97 41.81 40.87 40.97 40.74 40.76 40.70 40.52 41.84 40.92 40.86 40.97 40.76 TiO2 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.02 FeO 6.73 8.10 8.04 2.70 7.33 7.30 7.46 7.17 9.52 7.71 2.67 7.10 7.20 8.38 8.35 NiO 0.36 0.37 0.37 0.03 0.39 0.34 0.31 0.37 0.31 0.24 0.10 0.34 0.34 0.28 0.32 MnO 0.09 0.11 0.09 0.17 0.05 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.14 0.14 0.32 0.10 0.11 0.13 0.13 MgO 52.12 50.15 50.80 54.36 51.29 51.27 50.91 51.26 49.47 50.96 54.51 51.68 51.66 50.74 50.80 CaO 0.01 0.05 0.04 0.67 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.07 1.31 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04 Wt Sum 100.53 99.48 100.31 99.76 99.94 100.01 99.54 99.65 100.22 99.66 100.78 100.18 100.19 100.56 100.41 Cation Total 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 93.25 91.69 91.85 97.29 92.58 92.61 92.40 92.73 90.26 92.17 97.33 92.85 92.75 91.52 91.56 Sample LDC-07-234.0mA Label c7-5 c8-1 c8-2 c8-3 c8-4 c8-5 c8-6 c8-7 c9-1 c9-2 c9-3 c9-4 c9-5 c9-6 c10-1 Zone R C C C C C R R C C C R M R C Type P M M M M M M M M M M M P P M SiO2 40.75 40.87 40.98 40.85 41.17 40.75 40.67 40.39 41.40 41.09 40.98 40.74 40.30 40.53 40.59 TiO2 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 FeO 7.83 6.98 7.15 6.94 7.18 6.91 8.05 8.17 6.53 6.61 6.54 7.83 10.37 8.02 6.81 NiO 0.25 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.36 0.36 0.26 0.13 0.36 0.42 0.36 0.19 0.25 0.24 0.39 MnO 0.12 0.11 0.06 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.08 0.11 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.13 0.16 0.13 0.08 MgO 51.06 51.82 51.72 51.52 51.93 51.76 50.69 50.47 52.29 52.34 52.35 50.69 49.11 50.84 52.03 CaO 0.19 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.02 Wt Sum 100.22 100.17 100.27 99.77 100.75 99.87 99.78 99.35 100.69 100.58 100.36 99.64 100.24 99.82 99.91 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 Fo # 92.08 92.98 92.80 92.98 92.80 93.03 91.82 91.68 93.45 93.38 93.45 92.03 89.41 91.87 93.16 158 Table D.2 (cont.) Sample LDC-07-234.0mA Label c10-2 c10-3 c10-4 c10-5 c11-1 c11-2 c11-3 c11-4 c12-1 c12-2 c12-3 c12-4 c12-5 c13-1 c13-2 Zone C M R M C C C C C C C R R C C Type M M M M P P P P P P P P P M M SiO2 40.77 40.91 40.66 40.02 40.78 40.50 40.47 40.05 41.05 41.13 40.93 41.18 40.89 41.28 41.09 TiO2 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.00 0.01 FeO 6.74 7.83 8.13 10.71 8.74 8.58 8.60 8.63 6.88 6.79 6.86 7.73 6.91 6.77 6.63 NiO 0.38 0.39 0.26 0.28 0.40 0.37 0.38 0.32 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.40 0.20 0.37 0.37 MnO 0.05 0.15 0.12 0.16 0.09 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.06 0.08 0.06 0.13 0.04 0.09 MgO 51.62 50.99 50.48 48.29 49.98 49.95 49.55 50.06 51.89 51.90 51.82 50.69 52.05 51.64 51.69 CaO 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.14 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.14 0.01 0.02 Wt Sum 99.59 100.30 99.73 99.51 100.04 99.57 99.18 99.34 100.30 100.29 100.08 100.12 100.37 100.12 99.90 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.00 Fo # 93.17 92.07 91.72 88.93 91.06 91.21 91.13 91.18 93.07 93.16 93.08 92.12 93.07 93.15 93.29 Sample LDC-07-234.0mA Label c13-3 c13-4 c13-5 c13-6 c13-7 c13-8 c13-9 c13-10 c14-1 c14-2 c14-3 c14-4 c15-1 c15-2 c15-3 Zone C C C C C M R R C C C Rd C M R Type M M M M M M M M P P P P P P P SiO2 40.60 41.18 40.97 41.12 40.98 40.50 40.49 41.03 40.84 40.83 40.55 41.80 40.90 40.68 40.72 TiO2 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.04 0.01 FeO 6.71 6.76 6.86 6.95 6.84 9.75 8.10 8.20 7.83 7.87 7.93 2.43 7.46 8.48 8.06 NiO 0.45 0.43 0.41 0.42 0.39 0.20 0.26 0.13 0.37 0.41 0.36 0.05 0.40 0.27 0.17 MnO 0.07 0.05 0.11 0.11 0.06 0.13 0.14 0.12 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.28 0.07 0.11 0.13 MgO 51.14 51.63 51.41 51.59 51.62 49.07 50.62 50.42 50.74 50.55 50.60 54.58 51.72 50.27 50.81 CaO 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.85 0.00 0.06 0.07 Wt Sum 98.99 100.06 99.77 100.20 99.90 99.72 99.65 99.97 99.92 99.82 99.60 100.03 100.55 99.91 99.95 Cation Total 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 93.14 93.16 93.04 92.98 93.08 89.97 91.76 91.64 92.04 91.96 91.91 97.56 92.52 91.35 91.83 159 Table D.2 (cont.) Sample LDC-07-304mB Label c1-1 c1-2 c1-3 c2-1 c2-2 c3-1 c3-2 c3-3 c3-4 c4-1 c4-2 c4-3 c4-4 c5-1 c5-2 Zone C C R C R C R R R C C C R C C Type M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M SiO2 39.93 39.85 40.44 40.22 40.74 39.47 40.24 40.17 40.26 39.63 40.32 40.01 39.63 39.66 40.39 TiO2 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 FeO 10.46 10.41 8.15 6.81 8.16 12.91 8.29 8.33 8.41 8.62 8.11 6.71 8.20 6.81 6.96 NiO 0.21 0.22 0.38 0.39 0.32 0.33 0.36 0.37 0.13 0.29 0.36 0.33 0.37 0.34 0.34 MnO 0.14 0.14 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.18 0.13 0.08 0.13 0.15 0.13 0.07 0.10 0.06 0.08 MgO 48.43 48.83 50.83 51.80 51.60 46.79 50.51 50.43 50.96 50.16 51.50 51.76 50.12 51.45 51.89 CaO 0.04 0.03 0.08 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.13 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.19 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.09 Wt Sum 99.20 99.51 100.01 99.35 101.01 99.71 99.67 99.43 99.99 98.92 100.65 98.91 98.48 98.33 99.74 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.02 Fo # 89.19 89.31 91.74 93.13 91.85 86.59 91.57 91.52 91.53 91.21 91.89 93.22 91.59 93.09 93.01 Sample LDC-07-304mB Label c5-3 c5-4 c5-5 c5-6 c5-7 c6-1 c6-2 c7-1 c7-2 c7-3 c7-4 c7-5 c8-1 c8-2 c8-4 Zone C M R M M C R C C C R C C R R Type M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M SiO2 40.38 39.92 39.66 39.98 40.30 40.74 41.21 39.84 40.96 40.29 40.25 41.32 40.11 40.63 40.63 TiO2 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.01 FeO 7.03 9.08 7.99 10.33 9.26 6.98 7.96 6.38 6.46 6.62 8.18 6.43 7.96 7.99 8.04 NiO 0.33 0.20 0.42 0.21 0.24 0.33 0.11 0.42 0.43 0.37 0.21 0.40 0.34 0.16 0.35 MnO 0.10 0.13 0.11 0.13 0.14 0.10 0.14 0.10 0.08 0.12 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.13 0.14 MgO 51.37 50.12 49.88 49.27 50.05 52.03 50.73 52.78 52.58 51.91 50.00 52.88 50.49 51.14 51.21 CaO 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.07 0.06 Wt Sum 99.22 99.50 98.10 99.99 100.04 100.17 100.23 99.55 100.52 99.31 98.81 101.15 99.05 100.13 100.44 Cation Total 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.03 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 92.87 90.77 91.75 89.47 90.60 93.00 91.91 93.65 93.55 93.32 91.59 93.61 91.88 91.94 91.90 160 Table D.2 (cont.) Sample LDC-07-304mB Label c9-1 c9-2 c9-3 c9-4 c9-5 c9-6 Zone C C R R R C Type P P P P P P SiO2 39.14 39.41 39.81 39.57 39.43 39.12 TiO2 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.01 FeO 11.38 11.08 8.22 8.14 8.05 11.03 NiO 0.31 0.34 0.38 0.27 0.13 0.34 MnO 0.13 0.16 0.09 0.15 0.13 0.14 MgO 48.18 48.11 50.62 50.76 50.06 47.98 CaO 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 Wt Sum 99.17 99.12 99.19 98.95 97.86 98.64 Cation Total 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.02 Fo # 88.30 88.56 91.65 91.74 91.73 88.58 161 Table D.3: Electron Microprobe (EMP) major and minor element analyses in wt % of Leslie olivine from drill hole LDC-04. 2σ LODmin LODlim Sample LDC-04-285.71mB Label c1-1 c1-2 c1-3 c2-1 c2-2 c2-3 c2-4 c2-5 c2-6 c3-1 c3-2 c3-3 Zone C C R C C R R R Rd C C M Type X X X M M M M M M M M M SiO2 0.43 0.13 0.40 40.37 40.67 40.58 40.91 40.45 40.70 40.91 40.75 41.89 41.23 41.09 40.87 TiO2 0.02 0.04 0.11 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 FeO 0.26 0.11 0.34 8.91 8.41 8.40 7.10 7.03 8.23 8.47 8.38 3.77 6.96 7.04 8.22 NiO 0.05 0.08 0.24 0.40 0.36 0.11 0.38 0.34 0.37 0.15 0.15 0.03 0.36 0.33 0.31 MnO 0.04 0.07 0.23 0.12 0.12 0.15 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.14 0.15 0.24 0.09 0.08 0.12 MgO 0.52 0.10 0.31 49.80 50.58 50.56 51.26 51.20 50.49 50.77 50.65 53.97 51.48 51.76 50.45 CaO 0.02 0.03 0.09 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.00 Wt Sum 99.63 100.19 99.89 99.74 99.09 99.90 100.47 100.17 99.97 100.12 100.33 99.96 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 Fo # 90.88 91.47 91.48 92.79 92.85 91.62 91.44 91.50 96.23 92.95 92.91 91.63 Sample LDC-04-285.71mB Label c3-4 c3-5 c4-1 c4-2 c4-3 c4-4 c4-5 c4-6 c5-1 c5-2 c5-3 c5-4 c6-1 c7-1 c7-2 Zone R M C C R R R C C C R R C C C Type M M M M M M M P P P P P P M M SiO2 40.56 40.89 39.71 40.08 40.20 40.56 40.76 40.73 40.98 40.99 41.14 40.70 40.69 40.71 40.73 TiO2 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 FeO 8.89 8.63 11.21 11.12 8.27 8.34 8.08 8.17 7.19 7.19 8.26 8.19 8.09 6.75 6.61 NiO 0.31 0.29 0.36 0.34 0.15 0.13 0.14 0.34 0.29 0.38 0.16 0.14 0.31 0.44 0.43 MnO 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.10 0.14 0.17 0.10 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.15 0.08 0.05 MgO 49.76 50.38 47.58 47.84 50.99 50.47 50.92 50.24 51.94 51.79 50.73 50.39 50.65 52.22 52.15 CaO 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.07 0.03 0.03 0.07 0.07 0.21 0.00 0.00 Wt Sum 99.71 100.38 99.04 99.55 99.78 99.70 100.12 99.69 100.57 100.49 100.49 99.63 100.12 100.21 99.98 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.02 3.01 Fo # 90.89 91.23 88.32 88.46 91.66 91.52 91.83 91.64 92.79 92.78 91.63 91.64 91.78 93.24 93.37 162 Table D.3 (cont.) Sample LDC-04-285.71mB Label c7-3 c7-4 c7-5 c7-6 c7-7 c7-8 c8-1 c8-2 c8-3 c8-4 c9-1 c9-2 c9-3 c9-4 c10-1 Zone C M M R R R C R R R C C R R C Type M M M M M M P P P P M M M M M SiO2 40.84 40.30 39.91 40.45 40.49 40.94 40.88 40.81 40.63 41.00 40.26 40.58 39.94 40.44 39.86 TiO2 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.03 0.01 FeO 7.24 9.46 9.67 8.22 8.46 8.02 7.36 8.63 7.99 8.35 9.24 9.17 8.37 8.52 11.33 NiO 0.44 0.32 0.31 0.40 0.11 0.19 0.37 0.35 0.25 0.17 0.29 0.27 0.09 0.14 0.37 MnO 0.07 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.10 0.12 0.10 0.11 0.14 0.21 0.15 0.14 0.11 0.17 MgO 51.40 49.35 49.11 50.32 50.43 51.25 51.63 50.47 51.12 50.90 50.01 49.75 50.13 50.29 48.08 CaO 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.07 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.15 0.04 0.03 Wt Sum 99.99 99.63 99.19 99.62 99.72 100.60 100.39 100.41 100.16 100.65 100.06 99.94 98.85 99.57 99.86 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 92.68 90.29 90.05 91.60 91.40 91.93 92.59 91.25 91.94 91.57 90.61 90.63 91.44 91.32 88.33 Sample LDC-04-285.71mB LDC-04-192.82mB Label c10-2 c10-3 c10-4 c11-1 c11-2 c11-3 c11-4 c11-5 c11-6 c1-1 c1-2 c2-1 c2-2 c2-3 c2-4 Zone R R C C C C R R Rd C R C M M M Type M M M P P P P P P M M M M M M SiO2 41.00 40.68 39.90 39.85 40.17 39.88 40.45 40.51 40.69 40.81 40.82 40.19 39.96 39.38 39.60 TiO2 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.08 0.05 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.03 FeO 8.48 7.86 11.04 11.34 10.97 10.97 8.57 8.28 2.74 8.71 8.03 6.99 7.91 8.61 8.59 NiO 0.13 0.22 0.35 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.35 0.10 0.07 0.36 0.15 0.31 0.35 0.30 0.33 MnO 0.14 0.11 0.17 0.14 0.13 0.16 0.09 0.17 0.34 0.13 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.13 0.10 MgO 50.96 50.81 48.57 48.55 47.76 47.83 50.54 50.14 52.95 50.13 51.24 51.49 51.04 50.06 49.83 CaO 0.05 0.21 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.06 2.73 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 Wt Sum 100.78 99.94 100.05 100.31 99.44 99.24 100.06 99.29 99.59 100.22 100.43 99.15 99.44 98.55 98.51 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.00 3.01 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.02 Fo # 91.46 92.02 88.69 88.42 88.59 88.60 91.31 91.53 97.18 91.12 91.92 92.92 92.00 91.20 91.18 163 Table D.3 (cont.) Sample LDC-04-192.82mB Label c2-5 c2-6 c2-7 c2-8 c2-9 c3-1 c3-2 c4-1 c4-2 c4-4 c4-5 c5-1 c5-2 c5-3 c5-4 Zone R C C M R C R C C R R C C M R Type M M M M M P P M M M M P P P P SiO2 39.56 40.14 40.05 40.16 40.17 39.76 40.24 40.24 39.44 40.43 40.46 39.47 39.06 39.69 40.10 TiO2 0.00 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.02 FeO 8.38 6.85 7.40 8.64 8.14 8.33 8.33 9.28 9.30 8.15 8.21 10.27 10.15 8.59 8.32 NiO 0.22 0.34 0.36 0.34 0.28 0.42 0.15 0.32 0.35 0.22 0.22 0.25 0.25 0.39 0.16 MnO 0.12 0.10 0.12 0.11 0.15 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.11 0.14 0.16 0.13 0.11 0.15 MgO 50.42 51.64 51.40 50.72 51.03 50.15 50.70 49.72 49.53 51.27 50.50 49.09 49.25 50.16 50.67 CaO 0.02 0.04 0.22 0.03 0.20 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.06 Wt Sum 98.73 99.14 99.59 100.01 100.00 98.81 99.65 99.73 98.77 100.27 99.60 99.29 98.90 98.98 99.47 Cation Total 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.02 3.01 3.02 3.03 3.02 3.02 Fo # 91.47 93.08 92.52 91.28 91.79 91.48 91.56 90.52 90.47 91.81 91.65 89.50 89.64 91.24 91.56 Sample LDC-04-192.82mB Label c5-6 c5-7 c6-1 c6-2 c6-3 c6-4 c7-1 c7-2 c7-3 c7-4 c7-5 c7-6 c7-7 c8-1 c9-1 Zone C C C C R R C C M M R R R C C Type P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P SiO2 39.33 39.19 39.31 39.30 40.19 40.44 40.57 40.04 39.73 39.85 40.17 40.45 40.61 39.97 40.16 TiO2 0.02 0.04 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.02 FeO 10.19 10.11 12.21 12.02 8.43 7.56 7.03 6.83 9.25 9.22 7.95 7.97 7.55 8.07 8.41 NiO 0.25 0.24 0.25 0.24 0.36 0.14 0.35 0.32 0.23 0.25 0.24 0.15 0.16 0.27 0.41 MnO 0.12 0.16 0.14 0.16 0.10 0.20 0.09 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.12 0.10 0.13 0.12 0.10 MgO 49.23 49.14 47.29 47.35 50.73 50.85 51.19 51.28 49.27 49.79 50.66 50.90 51.47 50.49 50.48 CaO 0.04 0.10 0.04 0.06 0.07 0.11 0.02 0.01 0.16 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.14 0.08 0.04 Wt Sum 99.19 98.99 99.24 99.16 99.91 99.36 99.25 98.59 98.79 99.28 99.20 99.64 100.10 99.03 99.62 Cation Total 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 89.59 89.66 87.35 87.53 91.47 92.30 92.85 93.04 90.47 90.59 91.91 91.93 92.39 91.78 91.45 164 Table D.3 (cont.) Sample LDC-04-192.82mB Label c9-2 c10-1 c10-2 c10-3 c10-4 c10-5 c10-6 c10-7 c11-1 c11-2 c11-3 c12-1 c12-2 c13-1 c13-2 Zone Rd C C C R R R C C R Rd C R C C Type P M M M M M M M P P P P P M M SiO2 40.68 40.24 39.79 39.55 39.55 39.05 39.32 40.16 40.46 40.06 41.47 40.03 40.32 40.23 39.97 TiO2 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.01 FeO 2.55 6.97 6.83 6.85 7.48 8.59 8.24 6.81 9.53 8.33 2.83 8.38 8.38 8.56 8.32 NiO 0.07 0.36 0.35 0.34 0.36 0.37 0.13 0.33 0.26 0.40 0.10 0.38 0.16 0.32 0.34 MnO 0.27 0.06 0.08 0.09 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.14 0.12 0.31 0.12 0.15 0.11 0.14 MgO 54.38 51.74 52.09 51.72 51.32 49.98 50.13 51.67 49.60 50.49 54.16 50.59 50.67 50.68 50.46 CaO 1.17 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.04 1.53 0.05 0.08 0.02 0.05 Wt Sum 99.13 99.38 99.14 98.56 98.86 98.14 98.04 99.09 100.05 99.46 100.43 99.55 99.78 99.96 99.29 Cation Total 3.02 3.02 3.03 3.03 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.02 3.02 Fo # 97.44 92.98 93.15 93.08 92.44 91.21 91.56 93.12 90.27 91.53 97.15 91.50 91.51 91.34 91.54 Sample LDC-04-192.82mB Label c14-1 c14-2 c14-3 c14-4 c14-5 c14-6 c15-1 c15-2 c15-3 c15-4 c15-5 c16-1 c16-2 c16-3 c16-4 Zone C C M R R R C R C C R C C M R Type P P P P P P M M M M M M M M M SiO2 40.94 40.90 40.35 40.54 40.61 40.65 40.06 40.81 40.72 40.61 40.10 40.49 40.59 40.62 39.83 TiO2 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 FeO 6.78 6.55 8.74 8.47 8.07 8.47 9.67 8.30 9.48 6.90 8.34 6.86 6.70 7.36 8.27 NiO 0.35 0.37 0.35 0.39 0.21 0.18 0.28 0.26 0.31 0.40 0.18 0.40 0.38 0.37 0.37 MnO 0.12 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.09 0.06 0.12 0.10 0.07 0.14 0.12 MgO 52.27 52.05 50.61 50.48 51.13 50.94 49.58 50.92 49.70 52.28 50.65 52.29 52.31 51.65 50.96 CaO 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 Wt Sum 100.50 100.01 100.20 100.03 100.23 100.42 99.76 100.45 100.35 100.27 99.47 100.16 100.05 100.14 99.64 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.01 3.02 Fo # 93.22 93.40 91.17 91.39 91.86 91.47 90.14 91.62 90.33 93.11 91.55 93.14 93.30 92.60 91.66 165 Table D.3 (cont.) Sample LDC-04-192.82mB Label c16-5 c16-6 c16-7 c17-1 c17-2 c17-3 c17-4 c17-5 c17-6 c18-1 c18-2 c18-3 c18-4 c18-5 c19-1 Zone R M M C C M M R C C M R R Rd C Type M M M M M M M M M M M M M M N SiO2 40.46 40.58 40.75 39.22 39.37 39.54 39.24 40.24 39.04 39.51 40.51 39.94 40.24 41.53 39.97 TiO2 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.01 FeO 8.38 7.82 7.64 13.50 13.23 10.57 10.54 8.23 13.20 6.92 9.84 8.09 8.09 2.47 7.55 NiO 0.18 0.33 0.35 0.30 0.33 0.22 0.21 0.23 0.34 0.37 0.28 0.39 0.22 0.12 0.42 MnO 0.13 0.11 0.12 0.14 0.17 0.13 0.13 0.16 0.17 0.10 0.19 0.11 0.16 0.27 0.08 MgO 50.65 51.16 51.51 46.28 46.79 48.84 49.75 50.85 46.36 51.82 49.66 50.81 50.84 55.23 50.53 CaO 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.11 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.11 1.12 0.04 Wt Sum 99.87 100.06 100.43 99.47 99.91 99.36 99.94 99.78 99.23 98.75 100.52 99.38 99.70 100.77 98.62 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.02 3.03 3.02 3.02 3.03 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.02 3.01 Fo # 91.50 92.10 92.31 85.93 86.31 89.18 89.38 91.68 86.22 93.04 90.00 91.80 91.80 97.56 92.26 Sample LDC-04-192.82mB LDC-04-111.17mA Label c19-2 c19-3 c19-4 c19-5 c19-6 c19-7 c19-8 c19-9 c1-1 c1-2 c1-3 c1-4 c1-5 c2-1 c2-2 Zone C C C C C C C C C C C C C C M Type N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M SiO2 40.23 39.53 39.80 40.57 40.30 40.39 40.88 40.23 40.92 40.76 40.47 40.77 40.41 41.09 40.81 TiO2 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 FeO 7.62 7.59 7.71 8.02 8.00 8.10 7.37 7.51 8.65 8.52 8.40 8.55 8.68 6.83 9.43 NiO 0.36 0.40 0.37 0.38 0.40 0.39 0.39 0.37 0.39 0.41 0.42 0.40 0.42 0.36 0.27 MnO 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.13 0.09 0.14 0.09 0.13 0.14 0.13 0.09 0.12 0.14 0.09 0.15 MgO 51.50 50.92 51.06 50.50 50.98 50.80 51.62 51.52 50.75 50.30 50.71 50.51 50.20 51.70 49.62 CaO 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.02 Wt Sum 99.86 98.57 99.07 99.67 99.84 99.90 100.40 99.83 100.88 100.19 100.14 100.38 99.90 100.08 100.33 Cation Total 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 Fo # 92.33 92.28 92.19 91.82 91.91 91.78 92.58 92.45 91.27 91.32 91.50 91.33 91.16 93.10 90.36 166 Table D.3 (cont.) Sample LDC-04-111.17mA Label c2-3 c3-1 c3-2 c4-1 c4-2 c4-3 c4-4 c4-5 c5-1 c5-2 c5-3 c6-1 c6-2 c6-3 c6-7 Zone R C Rd C R C C C C Rd Rd C R R C Type M P P N N N N N P P P M M M P SiO2 40.75 40.23 41.04 40.24 41.06 40.65 40.29 40.22 40.38 42.09 41.65 40.28 40.31 40.31 40.59 TiO2 0.03 0.02 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.10 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.03 FeO 8.24 8.45 3.67 9.32 8.09 9.30 9.31 9.09 8.46 2.83 2.67 9.62 8.31 8.15 8.12 NiO 0.14 0.13 0.04 0.35 0.27 0.33 0.34 0.34 0.30 0.05 0.05 0.30 0.28 0.27 0.24 MnO 0.13 0.15 0.25 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.15 0.32 0.32 0.07 0.15 0.10 0.11 MgO 50.28 50.76 53.99 49.81 50.96 49.65 49.69 50.35 50.42 54.02 53.79 49.67 49.98 50.91 50.55 CaO 0.05 0.10 0.62 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.20 1.79 1.89 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.08 Wt Sum 99.63 99.84 99.67 99.87 100.55 100.09 99.80 100.17 99.94 101.14 100.48 99.98 99.09 99.82 99.72 Cation Total 3.00 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 91.58 91.46 96.33 90.50 91.82 90.49 90.49 90.80 91.40 97.14 97.29 90.20 91.47 91.76 91.73 Sample LDC-04-111.17mA Label c7-1 c7-2 c7-3 c7-4 c8-1 c8-3 c9-1 c9-2 Zone C Rd C R C R C R Type P P M M P P P P SiO2 39.96 41.60 40.03 40.64 40.53 40.53 39.35 40.61 TiO2 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.03 FeO 8.89 2.77 9.86 8.11 7.89 7.38 13.57 8.59 NiO 0.38 0.09 0.26 0.16 0.18 0.17 0.35 0.34 MnO 0.13 0.31 0.13 0.15 0.12 0.18 0.18 0.10 MgO 50.26 54.03 49.26 50.60 50.34 51.41 45.95 50.00 CaO 0.02 1.53 0.02 0.09 0.09 0.22 0.03 0.05 Wt Sum 99.68 100.33 99.58 99.78 99.16 99.95 99.44 99.73 Cation Total 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 90.98 97.20 89.90 91.75 91.92 92.54 85.79 91.20 167 Table D.4: Electron Microprobe (EMP) major and minor element analyses in wt % of Leslie olivine from drill hole LDC-03. 2σ LODmin LODlim Sample LDC-03-270mA Label c1-1 c1-2 c1-3 c1-4 c1-5 c1-6 c1-7 c2-1 c2-2 c2-3 c2-4 c2-5 Zone C C R R C C C C C M M M Type N N N N N N N P P P P P SiO2 0.43 0.13 0.39 40.80 40.95 40.90 41.06 40.89 41.07 40.52 41.41 41.42 40.90 40.35 40.73 TiO2 0.01 0.03 0.10 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.03 FeO 0.26 0.11 0.34 9.65 9.52 8.05 8.04 9.34 9.48 9.31 6.96 7.12 9.48 10.66 10.10 NiO 0.05 0.08 0.24 0.30 0.27 0.22 0.17 0.29 0.27 0.27 0.38 0.33 0.23 0.17 0.18 MnO 0.04 0.07 0.22 0.15 0.12 0.16 0.15 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.07 0.13 0.15 0.15 MgO 0.52 0.10 0.31 49.75 49.90 50.99 50.62 49.56 49.63 50.01 52.21 51.98 50.01 48.96 49.32 CaO 0.02 0.03 0.09 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.08 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.03 Wt Sum 100.71 100.83 100.41 100.13 100.22 100.57 100.30 101.08 100.94 100.79 100.36 100.54 Cation Total 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 Fo # 90.18 90.33 91.87 91.82 90.44 90.32 90.54 93.04 92.87 90.39 89.11 89.70 Sample LDC-03-270mA Label c2-6 c2-7 c2-8 c2-9 c2-10 c2-11 c2-12 c2-13 c3-1 c3-2 c3-3 c3-4 c3-5 c4-1 c4-2 Zone R Rd Rd C C M M R C C M R Rd C C Type P P P P P P P P M M M M M P P SiO2 40.94 42.53 42.40 41.37 41.22 40.60 40.44 39.69 40.30 40.72 41.05 41.08 42.23 40.83 40.89 TiO2 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.07 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 FeO 7.96 1.72 1.55 7.48 7.56 10.69 10.88 8.21 10.41 10.44 9.60 8.45 2.83 6.96 6.83 NiO 0.21 0.02 0.02 0.38 0.39 0.31 0.24 0.26 0.35 0.32 0.33 0.15 0.06 0.37 0.35 MnO 0.14 0.21 0.17 0.06 0.10 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.16 0.16 0.12 0.14 0.44 0.06 0.07 MgO 50.77 56.39 56.71 51.42 51.73 49.16 48.81 49.51 48.98 49.08 50.19 51.30 54.41 51.82 51.48 CaO 0.05 0.38 0.29 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.65 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.07 1.51 0.00 0.01 Wt Sum 100.10 101.27 101.15 100.74 101.00 100.93 100.58 98.52 100.20 100.75 101.35 101.21 101.51 100.05 99.63 Cation Total 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 91.92 98.32 98.49 92.45 92.43 89.13 88.88 91.49 89.35 89.34 90.31 91.54 97.16 92.99 93.07 168 Table D.4 (cont.) Sample LDC-03-270mA Label c4-3 c4-4 c4-5 c5-1 c5-2 c5-3 c5-4 c5-5 c5-6 c5-7 c5-9 c6-1 c6-2 c6-3 c6-4 Zone M R R C C C M M R R Rd C R R Rd Type P P P M M M M M M M M P P P P SiO2 40.34 40.59 40.77 40.57 41.45 41.02 40.40 40.73 40.94 40.74 42.11 40.19 40.95 40.81 42.24 TiO2 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.02 FeO 9.70 8.06 8.36 7.26 7.40 7.41 10.50 9.95 9.22 8.98 1.91 12.91 7.88 8.42 3.56 NiO 0.26 0.43 0.16 0.40 0.34 0.37 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.22 0.02 0.37 0.31 0.10 0.08 MnO 0.15 0.12 0.14 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.18 0.16 0.12 0.15 0.20 0.15 0.09 0.15 0.18 MgO 49.18 50.12 50.51 51.33 51.24 51.45 49.03 49.68 50.06 50.01 56.00 46.76 50.65 50.76 54.55 CaO 0.03 0.04 0.09 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.45 0.02 0.05 0.22 0.33 Wt Sum 99.69 99.38 100.06 99.67 100.51 100.35 100.40 100.83 100.66 100.18 100.71 100.40 99.93 100.50 100.95 Cation Total 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 Fo # 90.04 91.73 91.50 92.65 92.50 92.52 89.27 89.90 90.63 90.85 98.12 86.59 91.98 91.48 96.46 Sample LDC-03-270mA Label c7-1 c7-2 c7-3 c7-5 c7-7 c7-8 c8-1 c8-2 c8-3 c9-1 c9-2 c10-1 c10-2 c10-3 c10-4 Zone C C C M R Rd C R R C R C C C R Type P P P P P P P P P P P N N N N SiO2 40.66 41.53 41.24 40.71 40.97 41.76 40.70 40.54 40.38 40.83 40.91 40.55 40.49 40.52 40.62 TiO2 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.05 FeO 7.00 6.96 7.03 8.82 8.36 2.82 8.30 8.41 8.25 8.44 8.17 8.95 9.32 9.21 8.09 NiO 0.36 0.41 0.38 0.25 0.15 0.08 0.38 0.39 0.41 0.38 0.39 0.34 0.34 0.32 0.32 MnO 0.08 0.11 0.08 0.18 0.12 0.33 0.12 0.12 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.12 0.13 0.08 MgO 51.75 51.35 51.40 50.03 50.56 54.31 50.19 50.12 50.41 50.46 50.61 49.61 49.57 50.06 50.63 CaO 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.05 1.27 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.07 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.05 Wt Sum 99.86 100.35 100.16 100.03 100.24 100.60 99.71 99.62 99.65 100.29 100.29 99.61 99.89 100.28 99.85 Cation Total 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 92.95 92.94 92.87 91.00 91.51 97.17 91.51 91.39 91.59 91.42 91.69 90.81 90.46 90.64 91.77 169 Table D.4 (cont.) Sample LDC-03-270mA Label c10-5 c10-6 c10-7 c10-8 c10-9 c10-10 c10-11 c10-12 c10-13 c11-1 c11-2 c11-3 Zone R C C C C C C Rd C C C R Type N N N N N N N N N P P P SiO2 40.72 41.07 40.90 40.64 40.59 40.39 40.79 42.19 40.76 40.02 39.98 40.33 TiO2 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.04 0.03 FeO 8.21 9.02 9.41 9.04 9.05 9.19 9.07 1.84 9.19 9.27 9.01 8.22 NiO 0.26 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.36 0.36 0.34 0.02 0.33 0.32 0.33 0.26 MnO 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.15 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.10 0.14 0.14 0.12 MgO 50.46 50.10 50.22 50.13 50.12 50.34 50.13 55.85 50.39 49.55 49.74 50.11 CaO 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.08 0.35 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.06 Wt Sum 99.84 100.69 101.04 100.34 100.32 100.47 100.57 100.41 100.82 99.35 99.29 99.14 Cation Total 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 91.63 90.82 90.49 90.81 90.80 90.71 90.78 98.19 90.72 90.50 90.77 91.57 170 Table D.5: Electron Microprobe (EMP) major and minor element analyses in wt % of Leslie olivine from drill hole LDC-01. 2σ LODmin LODlim Sample LDC-01-226.94mA Label c1-1 c1-2 c1-3 c1-4 c1-5 c1-6 c1-7 c2-1 c2-2 c2-3 c2-4 c2-5 Zone C M C R R R C C C C C C Type P P P P P P P M M M M M SiO2 0.44 0.13 0.41 39.89 40.11 40.61 41.23 41.09 41.30 41.12 40.72 40.48 40.66 40.54 40.99 TiO2 0.01 0.04 0.11 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FeO 0.25 0.11 0.33 12.69 12.48 9.94 7.73 8.10 8.02 8.03 6.73 6.88 6.83 6.82 6.80 NiO 0.05 0.08 0.24 0.34 0.36 0.35 0.33 0.15 0.14 0.41 0.33 0.38 0.39 0.41 0.39 MnO 0.04 0.07 0.23 0.20 0.19 0.13 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.09 0.07 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.05 MgO 0.53 0.10 0.32 46.69 47.18 49.22 51.17 51.29 51.33 50.95 51.97 52.59 52.38 51.76 52.16 CaO 0.02 0.03 0.09 0.03 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.10 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.00 Wt Sum 99.86 100.34 100.32 100.62 100.80 100.98 100.73 99.85 100.43 100.36 99.68 100.40 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.02 3.01 3.01 Fo # 86.77 87.08 89.82 92.19 91.86 91.94 91.87 93.23 93.16 93.19 93.11 93.18 Sample LDC-01-226.94mA Label c2-6 c2-7 c2-8 c2-9 c2-10 c2-11 c2-12 c2-13 c2-14 c2-15 c2-16 c2-17 c2-18 c2-19 c3-1 Zone C C M R R R M R M C C C C R C Type M M M M M M M M M P P P P P P SiO2 40.97 41.14 40.54 40.89 40.89 41.22 40.76 40.59 40.30 40.74 40.72 40.67 39.78 40.97 41.26 TiO2 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.00 FeO 6.76 6.64 8.99 8.28 7.94 7.87 9.64 8.10 8.79 8.13 8.15 8.22 11.09 8.07 6.36 NiO 0.33 0.37 0.27 0.37 0.38 0.17 0.25 0.41 0.30 0.35 0.35 0.39 0.34 0.14 0.33 MnO 0.09 0.08 0.12 0.10 0.11 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.15 0.16 0.09 MgO 52.36 52.43 50.09 50.86 51.39 51.41 49.62 51.24 50.28 51.08 50.89 50.83 47.55 50.97 52.17 CaO 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.39 0.05 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.05 0.01 Wt Sum 100.52 100.67 100.05 100.56 100.77 100.90 100.48 100.53 100.21 100.50 100.33 100.32 99.01 100.37 100.24 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 93.24 93.37 90.85 91.63 92.03 92.09 90.18 91.85 91.07 91.80 91.76 91.68 88.43 91.85 93.59 171 Table D.5 (cont.) Sample LDC-01-226.94mA Label c3-2 c3-3 c3-4 c3-5 c3-6 c3-7 c3-8 c3-9 c3-10 c3-11 c3-12 c4-1 c4-2 c4-3 c4-4 Zone C C C M R R R Rd Rd C M C C C C Type P P P P P P P P P P P N N N N SiO2 41.18 41.25 40.93 40.74 40.96 40.91 40.88 41.79 39.48 41.32 40.14 39.19 40.82 41.24 41.48 TiO2 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.24 0.08 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.02 FeO 6.86 6.77 7.21 8.09 7.81 8.08 8.00 2.53 2.87 7.25 9.75 8.44 8.58 8.39 8.37 NiO 0.41 0.34 0.32 0.40 0.25 0.18 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.15 0.23 0.33 0.38 0.37 0.36 MnO 0.07 0.14 0.10 0.09 0.13 0.15 0.12 0.29 0.32 0.22 0.15 0.11 0.13 0.10 0.14 MgO 51.86 52.22 51.85 50.90 51.03 51.13 51.04 54.75 53.71 51.75 49.14 48.85 50.47 51.00 50.83 CaO 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.05 1.20 1.28 0.16 0.06 0.91 0.05 0.06 0.10 Wt Sum 100.38 100.73 100.44 100.30 100.23 100.49 100.24 100.67 97.99 100.92 99.50 97.84 100.45 101.18 101.29 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.03 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.00 Fo # 93.10 93.22 92.76 91.82 92.09 91.86 91.91 97.47 97.09 92.72 89.99 91.17 91.29 91.56 91.54 Sample LDC-01-226.94mA Label c4-5 c5-1 c5-2 c5-3 c5-4 c5-5 c5-6 c5-7 c5-8 c6-1 c6-2 c6-3 c6-4 c6-5 c6-6 Zone C C C R R R R C R C C C M M R Type P M M M M M M P P P P P P P P SiO2 40.96 40.49 40.82 40.56 40.50 40.91 40.72 40.58 41.43 41.10 41.44 41.02 40.46 40.64 41.07 TiO2 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 FeO 7.75 6.94 6.83 7.47 7.86 8.09 8.11 8.14 7.99 6.87 6.92 8.09 8.97 9.11 7.91 NiO 0.38 0.40 0.38 0.37 0.17 0.15 0.39 0.15 0.37 0.38 0.39 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.40 MnO 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.17 0.10 0.08 0.09 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.11 MgO 51.08 51.58 52.16 50.85 50.95 50.87 50.90 50.64 51.19 52.19 52.17 51.14 49.89 50.43 50.90 CaO 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.19 0.05 0.06 0.10 0.12 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.03 Wt Sum 100.32 99.56 100.35 99.40 99.82 100.20 100.32 99.81 101.23 100.64 101.02 100.76 99.83 100.74 100.45 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 Fo # 92.16 92.98 93.16 92.39 92.04 91.81 91.79 91.73 91.95 93.12 93.07 91.85 90.84 90.79 91.98 172 Table D.5 (cont.) Sample LDC-01-226.94mA Label c6-7 c6-8 c6-9 c6-10 c6-11 c6-12 c6-13 c7-1 c7-2 c8-1 c8-2 c8-3 c8-4 c8-5 c8-6 Zone R R R Rd Rd Rd M C R C C C C M M Type P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P SiO2 41.10 41.33 41.01 41.22 42.27 41.67 40.87 41.49 41.60 41.03 40.93 41.08 40.87 40.64 40.04 TiO2 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.04 FeO 7.90 8.15 8.03 7.22 1.93 2.41 8.86 7.99 7.91 6.86 6.81 7.07 7.08 10.98 11.10 NiO 0.26 0.18 0.13 0.20 0.07 0.08 0.33 0.39 0.19 0.35 0.37 0.34 0.38 0.20 0.17 MnO 0.12 0.15 0.15 0.20 0.23 0.30 0.14 0.08 0.13 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.10 0.17 0.19 MgO 51.17 50.98 51.00 51.88 55.60 54.81 50.02 50.95 51.45 51.63 51.78 51.85 51.84 48.38 48.45 CaO 0.04 0.03 0.07 0.39 0.60 1.26 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.02 Wt Sum 100.61 100.86 100.43 101.23 100.73 100.55 100.27 100.96 101.36 99.96 100.01 100.41 100.31 100.42 100.01 Cation Total 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 Fo # 92.03 91.77 91.88 92.75 98.09 97.60 90.97 91.91 92.06 93.06 93.13 92.90 92.88 88.71 88.61 Sample LDC-01-226.94mA Label c8-7 c8-8 c8-9 c8-10 c8-11 c8-12 c8-13 c8-14 c9-1 c9-2 c9-3 c9-4 c9-5 c9-6 c9-8 Zone R R R M M R C Rd C C C C R R C Type P P P P P P P P N N N N P P P SiO2 40.69 40.51 40.21 40.54 40.52 41.17 41.37 42.90 40.85 40.78 41.20 41.44 41.45 41.49 41.17 TiO2 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.02 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.04 FeO 8.15 7.91 8.01 11.36 10.95 7.97 8.63 1.42 7.68 7.43 7.66 7.29 8.00 8.09 8.78 NiO 0.37 0.23 0.15 0.26 0.28 0.18 0.36 0.03 0.46 0.42 0.41 0.37 0.25 0.14 0.32 MnO 0.14 0.12 0.16 0.19 0.17 0.12 0.15 0.21 0.10 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 MgO 50.26 50.42 50.55 48.29 48.27 51.14 50.78 57.59 51.50 51.19 51.08 51.37 51.75 51.12 50.42 CaO 0.05 0.03 0.13 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.32 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.04 Wt Sum 99.68 99.25 99.28 100.69 100.22 100.65 101.35 102.47 100.64 99.94 100.49 100.62 101.63 101.04 100.87 Cation Total 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.00 Fo # 91.66 91.91 91.83 88.34 88.71 91.96 91.29 98.64 92.28 92.47 92.24 92.63 92.02 91.85 91.10 173 Table D.5 (cont.) Sample LDC-01-226.94mA Label c9-9 c9-10 c9-11 c9-12 c10-1 c10-2 c10-3 c11-1 c11-2 c12-1 c12-2 c12-3 c12-4 c12-5 c12-6 Zone R C R C C Rd R C R C C C R R R Type P P P P P P P P P M M M M M M SiO2 41.09 40.81 41.32 41.35 41.00 42.42 41.07 40.78 40.77 40.03 40.24 39.91 40.59 40.82 40.80 TiO2 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.03 0.01 FeO 8.07 8.19 7.84 8.14 8.40 2.79 7.93 8.17 7.78 10.86 10.70 10.41 8.32 8.12 8.07 NiO 0.12 0.37 0.23 0.24 0.41 0.09 0.24 0.37 0.34 0.46 0.39 0.42 0.36 0.11 0.11 MnO 0.17 0.14 0.08 0.11 0.13 0.31 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.16 0.12 0.14 0.13 0.14 0.17 MgO 50.69 50.67 51.62 51.55 50.81 54.49 50.79 50.76 51.55 48.89 48.52 48.21 50.17 50.75 51.36 CaO 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.04 1.63 0.06 0.08 0.09 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.97 0.05 0.05 Wt Sum 100.24 100.25 101.18 101.47 100.80 101.75 100.22 100.29 100.66 100.41 99.99 99.10 100.57 100.01 100.57 Cation Total 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 91.80 91.69 92.15 91.86 91.51 97.21 91.95 91.71 92.20 88.92 88.99 89.19 91.49 91.76 91.90 Sample LDC-01-226.94mA Label c8-7 c8-8 c8-9 c8-10 c8-11 c8-12 c8-13 c8-14 c9-1 c9-2 c9-3 c9-4 c9-5 c9-6 c9-8 Zone R R R M M R C Rd C C C C R R C Type P P P P P P P P N N N N P P P SiO2 40.69 40.51 40.21 40.54 40.52 41.17 41.37 42.90 40.85 40.78 41.20 41.44 41.45 41.49 41.17 TiO2 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.02 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.04 FeO 8.15 7.91 8.01 11.36 10.95 7.97 8.63 1.42 7.68 7.43 7.66 7.29 8.00 8.09 8.78 NiO 0.37 0.23 0.15 0.26 0.28 0.18 0.36 0.03 0.46 0.42 0.41 0.37 0.25 0.14 0.32 MnO 0.14 0.12 0.16 0.19 0.17 0.12 0.15 0.21 0.10 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 MgO 50.26 50.42 50.55 48.29 48.27 51.14 50.78 57.59 51.50 51.19 51.08 51.37 51.75 51.12 50.42 CaO 0.05 0.03 0.13 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.32 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.04 Wt Sum 99.68 99.25 99.28 100.69 100.22 100.65 101.35 102.47 100.64 99.94 100.49 100.62 101.63 101.04 100.87 Cation Total 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.00 Fo # 91.66 91.91 91.83 88.34 88.71 91.96 91.29 98.64 92.28 92.47 92.24 92.63 92.02 91.85 91.10 174 Table D.5 (cont.) Sample LDC-01-226.94mA Label c9-9 c9-10 c9-11 c9-12 c10-1 c10-2 c10-3 c11-1 c11-2 c12-1 c12-2 c12-3 c12-4 c12-5 c12-6 Zone R C R C C Rd R C R C C C R R R Type P P P P P P P P P M M M M M M SiO2 41.09 40.81 41.32 41.35 41.00 42.42 41.07 40.78 40.77 40.03 40.24 39.91 40.59 40.82 40.80 TiO2 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.03 0.01 FeO 8.07 8.19 7.84 8.14 8.40 2.79 7.93 8.17 7.78 10.86 10.70 10.41 8.32 8.12 8.07 NiO 0.12 0.37 0.23 0.24 0.41 0.09 0.24 0.37 0.34 0.46 0.39 0.42 0.36 0.11 0.11 MnO 0.17 0.14 0.08 0.11 0.13 0.31 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.16 0.12 0.14 0.13 0.14 0.17 MgO 50.69 50.67 51.62 51.55 50.81 54.49 50.79 50.76 51.55 48.89 48.52 48.21 50.17 50.75 51.36 CaO 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.04 1.63 0.06 0.08 0.09 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.97 0.05 0.05 Wt Sum 100.24 100.25 101.18 101.47 100.80 101.75 100.22 100.29 100.66 100.41 99.99 99.10 100.57 100.01 100.57 Cation Total 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 91.80 91.69 92.15 91.86 91.51 97.21 91.95 91.71 92.20 88.92 88.99 89.19 91.49 91.76 91.90 Sample LDC-01-226.94mA Label c12-7 c12-8 c13-1 c13-2 c13-3 c13-4 c13-5 c13-6 c13-7 c13-8 c13-9 c14-1 c14-2 c14-3 c14-4 Zone C R C C C R R R R C R C C C C Type P P P P P P P P P P P M M M M SiO2 40.57 41.00 40.13 39.95 40.94 40.59 40.64 40.62 40.86 40.91 41.03 40.86 41.16 40.71 41.01 TiO2 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 FeO 9.11 7.96 6.75 6.73 7.24 8.57 8.62 8.22 8.05 7.98 8.13 6.34 6.31 6.21 6.76 NiO 0.34 0.16 0.38 0.35 0.30 0.31 0.29 0.32 0.19 0.38 0.15 0.35 0.37 0.37 0.31 MnO 0.12 0.15 0.09 0.11 0.08 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.14 0.15 0.14 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 MgO 49.93 51.67 51.60 51.76 51.20 50.50 50.22 50.64 50.71 51.35 51.13 52.32 52.61 52.13 51.84 CaO 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 Wt Sum 100.13 100.99 98.99 98.92 99.77 100.14 99.95 99.95 100.02 100.86 100.67 99.95 100.56 99.52 100.02 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.02 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 90.72 92.05 93.16 93.20 92.65 91.31 91.22 91.66 91.82 91.98 91.81 93.63 93.69 93.74 93.18 175 Table D.5 (cont.) Sample LDC-01-226.94mA Label c14-5 c14-6 c14-7 c14-8 c14-9 c15-1 c15-2 c15-3 c15-4 c15-5 c15-6 c15-7 c15-8 c16-1 c16-2 Zone R R C C R C C C R R R Rd C C C Type M M P P P M M M M M M P P M M SiO2 40.30 40.97 40.54 41.19 41.04 40.51 40.87 40.71 40.73 40.84 40.18 42.91 41.24 41.25 41.57 TiO2 0.03 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 FeO 7.99 7.72 8.07 7.94 8.12 9.60 9.49 8.70 7.78 7.92 6.75 2.53 8.16 6.54 6.77 NiO 0.13 0.30 0.40 0.39 0.25 0.28 0.28 0.34 0.39 0.21 0.11 0.10 0.36 0.38 0.40 MnO 0.12 0.10 0.15 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.30 0.13 0.11 0.09 MgO 50.56 50.75 51.28 50.79 51.60 49.37 50.06 50.47 51.03 51.19 50.90 55.33 50.56 52.08 52.26 CaO 0.04 0.03 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.18 0.11 0.21 0.44 1.57 0.09 0.01 0.00 Wt Sum 99.16 99.91 100.51 100.47 101.23 99.93 100.88 100.56 100.17 100.50 98.52 102.75 100.56 100.37 101.10 Cation Total 3.01 3.00 3.02 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 Fo # 91.86 92.14 91.89 91.94 91.89 90.17 90.39 91.18 92.12 92.02 93.07 97.50 91.69 93.42 93.22 Sample LDC-01-226.94mA LDC-01-140.79mA Label c16-3 c16-4 c16-5 c16-6 c16-7 c16-8 c1-1 c1-2 c2-1 c2-2 c2-3 c2-4 c3-1 c3-2 c3-3 Zone C M M R R R C M C C M R C C C Type M M M M M M X X X X X X X X X SiO2 41.63 40.98 41.08 41.30 40.57 40.88 41.09 40.38 40.08 41.45 40.67 41.97 41.11 41.35 41.70 TiO2 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 FeO 6.71 8.70 8.48 7.93 7.12 8.10 6.56 9.20 6.32 6.24 9.05 7.00 6.39 6.42 6.36 NiO 0.40 0.33 0.37 0.23 0.15 0.15 0.34 0.16 0.38 0.40 0.35 0.13 0.32 0.34 0.32 MnO 0.07 0.17 0.12 0.11 0.13 0.19 0.09 0.20 0.10 0.11 0.14 0.20 0.08 0.06 0.08 MgO 52.33 50.06 50.72 51.82 51.32 51.07 52.42 50.22 51.72 52.51 49.84 52.88 52.96 52.44 52.77 CaO 0.01 0.03 0.06 0.06 0.59 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.16 0.02 0.00 0.05 Wt Sum 101.15 100.30 100.85 101.46 99.91 100.44 100.51 100.20 98.60 100.72 100.14 102.36 100.90 100.61 101.28 Cation Total 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 93.29 91.12 91.43 92.10 92.78 91.83 93.44 90.68 93.58 93.75 90.76 93.09 93.66 93.57 93.67 176 Table D.5 (cont.) Sample LDC-01-140.79mA Label c4-1 c4-2 c4-3 c5-1 c5-2 c5-3 c6-1 c6-2 c6-3 c6-4 c6-5 c6-6 c7-1 c7-2 c7-3 Zone C C C C M C C C C R R R C C R Type X X X X X X M M M M M M P P P SiO2 40.93 40.66 41.26 41.77 40.93 41.64 40.81 40.42 40.50 40.22 40.48 40.81 40.97 40.84 41.15 TiO2 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.03 FeO 6.32 6.34 6.49 6.29 8.88 6.49 6.60 6.90 6.66 8.24 7.95 8.06 7.88 8.04 8.20 NiO 0.38 0.32 0.36 0.38 0.19 0.37 0.32 0.38 0.32 0.36 0.17 0.12 0.33 0.38 0.35 MnO 0.07 0.10 0.08 0.12 0.20 0.07 0.10 0.07 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.14 MgO 52.69 52.27 52.72 52.70 50.78 52.73 51.99 52.25 51.98 50.84 51.11 50.92 51.29 51.23 51.33 CaO 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.03 Wt Sum 100.40 99.69 100.94 101.28 101.04 101.32 99.82 100.04 99.57 99.83 99.91 100.13 100.67 100.62 101.23 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 90.72 92.05 93.16 93.20 92.65 91.31 91.22 91.66 91.82 91.98 91.81 93.63 93.69 93.74 93.18 Sample LDC-01-226.94mA Label c7-4 c7-5 c7-6 c8-1 c8-2 c9-1 c9-2 c9-3 c9-4 c9-5 c10-1 c10-2 c10-3 c11-1 c11-2 Zone R C R C Rd C M R C M C Rd Rd C R Type P P P P P M M M P M P P P P P SiO2 41.11 40.73 41.04 40.85 41.67 41.31 40.27 41.18 41.37 40.46 40.52 42.01 42.15 40.79 41.33 TiO2 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 FeO 8.04 8.21 7.84 7.81 2.75 6.98 11.64 7.80 7.98 12.00 8.43 2.75 2.92 7.86 7.95 NiO 0.18 0.40 0.26 0.14 0.09 0.31 0.16 0.27 0.26 0.14 0.41 0.11 0.14 0.13 0.26 MnO 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.15 0.30 0.11 0.17 0.13 0.12 0.17 0.11 0.41 0.37 0.10 0.12 MgO 50.66 50.82 51.19 50.97 54.62 51.86 47.83 51.10 51.41 48.21 50.71 54.64 54.89 51.46 51.66 CaO 0.05 0.11 0.05 0.06 1.55 0.02 0.03 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.05 1.85 1.68 0.04 0.03 Wt Sum 100.13 100.37 100.51 100.00 101.09 100.59 100.14 100.56 101.22 101.01 100.25 101.80 102.17 100.41 101.37 Cation Total 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 91.82 91.69 92.09 92.09 97.25 92.98 87.98 92.11 91.99 87.75 91.47 97.25 97.10 92.11 92.05 177 Table D.5 (cont.) Sample LDC-01-140.79mA Label c12-1 c12-2 c13-1 c13-2 c13-3 c13-4 c13-5 c13-6 c13-7 c13-8 c13-9 c13-10 c13-11 c13-12 c13-13 Zone C R C C C C M M R R C C C C Rd Type P P M M M M M M M M M P P P P SiO2 41.69 40.48 41.45 41.04 41.37 41.35 40.84 40.47 41.01 40.69 40.72 40.68 40.29 40.35 40.79 TiO2 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.06 FeO 7.21 7.95 6.90 6.77 7.11 6.91 9.47 10.19 7.85 7.76 7.07 7.97 8.52 8.15 3.12 NiO 0.41 0.18 0.37 0.36 0.33 0.38 0.29 0.19 0.38 0.17 0.35 0.35 0.33 0.33 0.11 MnO 0.12 0.14 0.09 0.11 0.09 0.10 0.14 0.14 0.08 0.13 0.09 0.12 0.09 0.12 0.31 MgO 51.72 50.97 52.01 52.31 52.30 52.06 49.49 49.84 50.77 50.85 51.91 51.22 50.61 50.74 53.04 CaO 0.03 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.01 0.05 0.06 0.05 1.68 Wt Sum 101.18 99.80 100.84 100.60 101.21 100.80 100.26 100.89 100.15 99.70 100.16 100.42 99.93 99.77 99.11 Cation Total 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 Fo # 92.74 91.96 93.07 93.23 92.91 93.07 90.31 89.71 92.01 92.11 92.90 91.97 91.37 91.74 96.80 Sample LDC-01-226.94mA Label c14-1 c14-2 c14-3 c15-1 c15-2 c15-3 c15-4 c15-5 c15-6 c15-7 c15-8 c16-1 c16-2 c16-3 c17-1 Zone C R R C C C C R C C C C R R C Type P P P N N N N N N P P M M M M SiO2 41.11 40.88 40.89 40.98 40.78 40.77 41.07 40.62 40.56 40.53 40.04 40.81 40.74 41.19 40.41 TiO2 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 FeO 7.21 8.30 8.20 7.34 7.93 7.89 7.22 7.82 7.82 8.05 8.18 7.31 8.37 8.22 9.16 NiO 0.34 0.35 0.14 0.39 0.34 0.42 0.39 0.26 0.40 0.41 0.39 0.39 0.35 0.38 0.36 MnO 0.10 0.13 0.14 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.10 0.13 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.14 0.10 MgO 51.72 50.89 51.48 51.73 51.03 51.08 51.53 50.93 50.88 50.33 51.10 51.48 51.00 50.78 49.95 CaO 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.04 0.15 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 Wt Sum 100.51 100.62 100.91 100.56 100.24 100.29 100.34 99.85 99.83 99.62 99.91 100.15 100.62 100.76 100.02 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 Fo # 92.75 91.62 91.80 92.62 91.98 92.02 92.72 92.06 92.06 91.77 91.76 92.62 91.57 91.68 90.67 178 Table D.5 (cont.) Sample LDC-01-140.79mA Label c17-2 c17-3 c17-4 c18-1 c18-2 c18-3 c19-1 c19-2 c19-3 c19-4 c20-1 c20-2 c20-3 c20-4 c20-5 Zone R C C C C R C M R C C C R R R Type M M P M M M P P P P P P P P P SiO2 41.01 39.53 40.95 40.68 40.87 40.22 40.82 39.97 39.97 40.58 40.88 41.35 41.33 41.03 40.59 TiO2 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.02 FeO 7.90 9.12 8.56 7.87 7.83 7.93 6.73 10.68 8.01 7.50 6.70 6.72 6.88 8.10 8.14 NiO 0.15 0.31 0.31 0.38 0.41 0.31 0.37 0.22 0.15 0.37 0.33 0.39 0.39 0.38 0.10 MnO 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.09 0.14 0.16 0.08 0.12 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.14 MgO 51.20 49.74 50.60 51.11 50.90 50.59 52.31 49.04 50.67 51.36 51.75 52.65 52.29 50.63 51.35 CaO 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.06 Wt Sum 100.47 98.86 100.61 100.22 100.19 99.23 100.33 100.12 99.01 99.93 99.80 101.23 101.02 100.32 100.39 Cation Total 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.00 3.01 Fo # 92.03 90.68 91.33 92.05 92.06 91.92 93.27 89.11 91.85 92.43 93.23 93.32 93.13 91.76 91.83 Sample LDC-01-226.94mA Label c20-6 c21-1 c21-2 c22-1 c22-2 c22-3 c22-4 c22-5 c22-6 c23-1 c23-2 c23-3 c23-4 c23-5 c24-1 Zone C C R C C R R C R C C R C R C Type P P P M M M M M M M M M P P P SiO2 41.04 40.70 44.67 41.30 41.64 41.21 41.31 40.74 39.85 41.06 40.87 40.82 40.56 40.43 39.31 TiO2 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.06 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 FeO 8.45 9.34 7.42 7.23 7.12 8.17 7.95 7.17 8.14 6.85 6.72 8.51 8.41 8.07 13.71 NiO 0.41 0.25 0.29 0.35 0.36 0.17 0.21 0.33 0.17 0.35 0.34 0.38 0.38 0.27 0.26 MnO 0.11 0.14 0.15 0.10 0.12 0.11 0.16 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.20 MgO 50.85 50.23 48.02 52.42 52.23 51.48 51.28 51.33 50.83 52.20 51.78 51.02 50.76 51.15 46.27 CaO 0.06 0.04 0.16 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.15 0.02 0.26 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.08 0.02 Wt Sum 100.94 100.73 100.76 101.42 101.47 101.20 101.11 99.71 99.41 100.59 99.86 100.89 100.29 100.13 99.79 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 2.93 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.01 Fo # 91.48 90.55 92.02 92.82 92.90 91.82 92.00 92.74 91.75 93.15 93.21 91.45 91.49 91.87 85.74 179 Table D.5 (cont.) Sample LDC-01-140.79mA Label c24-2 c25-1 c25-2 c25-3 c25-4 c25-5 c26-2 c26-3 c27-1 c27-2 c27-3 c27-4 c27-5 c27-6 c27-7 Zone R C R Rd Rd Rd C R C C C R R R C Type P P P P P P P P M M M M M M M SiO2 41.10 40.36 40.86 41.88 41.62 41.71 41.00 41.09 40.23 40.96 41.19 40.57 40.64 41.24 41.13 TiO2 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 FeO 8.02 7.96 7.81 2.64 2.52 2.55 8.38 7.92 6.34 6.35 6.51 7.89 7.90 8.13 6.33 NiO 0.17 0.39 0.34 0.09 0.06 0.08 0.40 0.29 0.34 0.33 0.36 0.40 0.15 0.17 0.31 MnO 0.08 0.12 0.13 0.37 0.35 0.37 0.14 0.11 0.09 0.06 0.07 0.15 0.12 0.17 0.07 MgO 51.95 50.85 51.01 54.81 54.38 55.03 50.45 51.28 51.90 52.22 52.82 51.27 51.80 51.23 52.40 CaO 0.04 0.07 0.05 1.57 1.30 1.39 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.08 0.02 Wt Sum 101.38 99.76 100.21 101.42 100.24 101.13 100.46 100.75 98.92 99.93 100.97 100.32 100.67 101.03 100.25 Cation Total 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.00 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.01 3.01 Fo # 92.03 91.93 92.09 97.37 97.46 97.46 91.47 92.03 93.58 93.62 93.54 92.06 92.12 91.82 93.66
Thesis/Dissertation
eng
Geological Sciences
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Graduate
Russell, J. K. (J. Kelly)
Olivine diversity in the Leslie kimberlite, NT, Canada : implications for transport and emplacement processes
Text