Next Article in Journal
Water Content in Garnet from Eclogites: Implications for Water Cycle in Subduction Channels
Next Article in Special Issue
Petrographical and Geochemical Characteristics of Magmatic Rocks in the Northwestern Siberian Traps Province, Kulyumber River Valley. Part II: Rocks of the Kulyumber Site
Previous Article in Journal
Archaeological Ceramic Diagenesis: Clay Mineral Recrystallization in Sherds from a Late Byzantine Kiln, Israel
Previous Article in Special Issue
Fingerprints of Kamafugite-Like Magmas in Mesozoic Lamproites of the Aldan Shield: Evidence from Olivine and Olivine-Hosted Inclusions
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Petrographical and Mineralogical Characteristics of Magmatic Rocks in the Northwestern Siberian Traps Province, Kulyumber River Valley. Part I: Rocks of the Khalil and Kaya Sites

1
Vernadsky Institute of Geochemistry and Analytical Chemistry, Russian Academy of Sciences, Kosygin st. 19, 119991 Moscow, Russia
2
A.P. Karpinsky Russian Geological Research Institute, Sredny Prospect, 74, 199106 St. Petersburg, Russia
3
Institute Geology of Ore Deposits, Petrography, Mineralogy and Geochemistry, Russian Academy of Sciences, Staromonetny per., 35, 119109 Moscow, Russia
4
Mining Institute of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 78a Sibirskaya St, 614007 Perm, Russia
5
Norilskgeology Ltd., Grazhdansky pr., 11, 195220 St. Petersburg, Russia
6
Zavaritsky Institute of Geology and Geochemistry of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Akademika Vonsovskogo Str., 15, 620016 Ekaterinburg, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Minerals 2020, 10(5), 409; https://doi.org/10.3390/min10050409
Submission received: 12 March 2020 / Revised: 19 April 2020 / Accepted: 20 April 2020 / Published: 30 April 2020

Abstract

:
The origin of the Siberian Traps province has been under discussion for the last three decades. Up to now, there is no real model of its formation in a good agreement with geological data on the magmatic evolution at P–T boundary in Eastern Siberia. Modern geochemical data on magmatic rocks around the province is a key to reconstructing magmatic development in time and space. Such data have been obtained for the Norilsk and Meimecha–Kotuy and not for other parts of the Siberian province. For the first time, we studied the geochemistry and mineralogy of magmatic rocks at the Kulyumber river valley, located in the intersection of the Tunguska syneclise and Norilsk–Igarka zone in the NW Siberian platform. In this article, we present data from the Khalil and Kaya sites of this area belonging to the Syverminsky, Gudchikhinsky, Khakanchansky and Nadezhdinsky formations. Their mineralogical and geochemical features (including Sr, Nd and Pb isotope data) are similar to the same formations in the Norilsk area, while the rocks belonging to the Gudchikhinsky formation show differences. The Syverminsky tuffs are also described for the first time. The intrusive rocks are attributed to four intrusive complexes, i.e., Ergalakhsky, Kureysky, Katangsky and Norilsk. The Ergalakhsky complex comprises trachydolerites similar to the trachydolerites of the Norilsk area. The rocks of the Norilsk complex at the Khalil site differ from the rocks of the same complex at the Norilsk area by the (U/Nb)n = 1.8, (La/Yb)n = 2.1 in comparison with 3.7 and 2.3 of the rocks of the Norilsk 1 intrusion. The intrusions of the Kureysky complex are more differentiated than those of the Katangsky intrusions but show comparable TiO2 and trace elements distribution. Thus, the magmatism of the Kulyumber area is characterized by features matching those of the Tunguska syneclise and Norilsk area, i.e., suggesting rift and platform regimes.

1. Introduction

The origin of large igneous provinces (LIPs) has been under discussion for the last three decades [1,2,3,4,5]. The Siberian Traps province—the largest continental flood basalt province on Earth—is attracting geologists by the huge volume of magmatic rocks (1.5 M km3, [6,7]), occurrence of extra-large PGE-Cu-Ni deposits [8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17] and a possible link with the Permian–Triassic mass extinction [18,19,20]. Despite continuous debates on its genesis [21,22,23,24,25,26], the problem of the Siberian Traps origin is far from its satisfactory explanation. Continued detailed study of magmatic rocks within the province is a key to understanding of its origin and reconstructing of its magmatic evolution in space and time around the Siberian province.
The great scale of the province and many remote areas in Eastern Siberia are the main reasons for incomplete information on this great volume of magmatic rocks. Modern geochemical studies have so far been conducted only for the Norilsk and Meimecha–Kotuy regions, which comprise PGE-Cu-Ni magmatic deposits and high alkaline rocks, respectively [27,28]. In these areas, major, trace and isotopic data are a valuable for lavas [29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37]. Data on intrusive rocks are more restricted in comparison with basalts and refer mainly to the Norilsk ore-bearing intrusions [14,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45]. Other parts of the province have been studied only in a reconnaissance way [46,47]—or not examined at all.
This study is focused on the Kulyumber area located in the middle part of the Kulyumber river valley which represents one of the least studied areas of the province (Figure 1). It is located between the Tunguska syncline and Norilsk–Igarka zone [48,49,50] and thus it provides information on the magmatic events within both structures at the Permian–Triassic boundary (250 ± 0.3 Ma; [51]). Within this territory effusive rocks and numerous intrusive bodies were found during the geological mapping. The volcanic rocks were subdivided into five formations according with the formations of the lower part of the tuff-lava sequence in the Norilsk area, i.e., Syverminsky, Gudchikhinsky, Khakanchansky, Tuklonsky and Nadezhdinsky formations [14]. Intrusions have been attributed to eight intrusive complexes located both in the Norilsk district and in Tunguska syneclise [14]. This division is doubtful, since it is based on the inner structure of intrusive bodies and structural and textural features of rocks.
The purpose of this work is to study the mineral composition and geochemical characteristics of igneous rocks and compare them with the rocks of the Norilsk area and Tunguska syneclise. As has been shown in [14,17,31,32,33], both OIB (Oceanic Island Basalts) and WPB (Within-Plate Basalts) occur in the Norilsk area and were formed in a rift system and during a platform magmatism. For the Tunguska syneclise only platform magmatism is described. Magmatism of the Norilsk area occurs mainly within the Yenisey–Khatangsky trough (YKT). The Kulyumber river valley is not considered as a part of the Norilsk and YKT but it is involved in the rift zone. There are many questions that are not answered about the formation of this region. What types of igneous rocks occur in the Kulumbe River valley? Are there any variations in the compositions of rocks along the strike of the tectonic structure from the north to the south? Or are they a constant homogeneous in composition? What types of primary magmas formed the igneous rocks of the Kulyumber river valley? How does a transition from rift magmatism to a platform one happen—abruptly or gradually? To answer these questions, we must collect information first of all on mineralogy and geochemistry of igneous rocks of this area.
Furthermore, the Kulyumber area is considered as a priority region for the discovery of new deposits because the geologists of the company, "Norilskgeology” have found the disseminated and massive sulfide ore in gabbro within this area, in contrast to other regions of the Siberian platform where only poor mineralization was detected. Does the rift zone from the Norilsk area and the Kulyumber area show a consistent trend of mineralization?

2. Tectonic Structure

The studied area is located in NW Eastern Siberia, 150 km to the south of the Norilsk ore district. The tectonic structure of the territories is complex due to their occurrence within two different structural blocks. The eastern part belongs to the Siberian craton consisting of a crystalline basement and a platform cover. The western part has a more complex structure due to the depth of the basement and a huge volume of sediments and intrusions within it.
First of all, we have performed a new geophysical map of the crystalline basement of north-western part of the Siberian platform where Kulyumber area is located (Figure 2). The initial data were the results of 1:200000 scale gravimetric and 1:100000 scale aeromagnetic mapping performed at constant barometric altitudes (700 m and 2400 m), as well as a digital landscape model GTOP030. The geophysical fields were converted to a horizontal plane with a height of 2400 m by approximation by equivalent sources [52]. This allowed to reduce the influence of the relief of the earth’s surface and local inhomogeneities in the upper part of the geological section. The measured values of the geomagnetic field intensity T were converted into the vertical component of the anomalous magnetic field ΔZ, which has a more distinct relationship with the anomaly forming objects. The network of points for digital models of fields and terrain used in processing is 2 × 2 km.
Figure 2 shows a submeridional band of positive values of the gravitational field stretched along the Yenisey River, about 100 km wide, bordering the ancient craton and extending beyond the southern frame of the area. This zone is probably a fragment of an ancient rift structure with increased mobility and permeability for magma, saturated with basic-ultrabasic magmatic rocks. The gravity anomaly has the form of a flattened funnel, elongated in the meridional (N–S) direction, with a "vent" (or "main supply channel") going into the upper mantle, which is located beneath the in area of Igarka city. The zone is characterized by low values of the magnetic field due to the presence of iron only in silicate form.
Of particular interest are the sub-latitudinal zone of low magnetic field values and slightly elevated values of the gravity field, covering the basins of the Kulyumber river and stretching to the upper flows of the Kureyka river (to the east from Snezhnogorsk city, Figure 2). According to geophysical data this zone is close to the Norilsk–Igarka zone and corresponds to the sub-latitude Dyupkun branch of the Norilsk–Igarka rift system [49,50] isolated by Malich [48]. Based on magnetic and gravity data we identified another rift structure, i.e., Tunguska branch, to east from Turukhansk City. It is weakly manifested in geophysical fields.
According to the morphology of geophysical fields there is a series of lineaments with north-western and sub-latitudinal directions, presumably corresponding to deep faults. The junctions of these faults are the most permeable magmas areas of the earth’s crust; they can be considered as regional criteria for massifs with platinum–copper–nickel mineralization. One of the largest junctions is located in the Norilsk district, the other one is fixed in the basin of the Kulyumber river.
The presence of local (20–40 km across) magnetic inhomogeneities modeled at 5 to 15 km deep, in some cases spatially combined with density inhomogeneities, was also established within the territory under consideration. Their geological nature has not yet been clearly defined.

3. Brief Geology of the Area

The local structures of the studied area are the Nirungdinsky Trough and the Mogen-Khalil Anticline (Figure 3) [53,54]. Sedimentary rocks are exposed on the surface and they are represented by Devonian carbonate–terrigenous rocks and Lower Carboniferous–Middle Permian (C2–P2) sediments comprising sandstones and coal. Early Triassic magmatic rocks belong to the Siberian flood basalts province. Volcanic rocks were subdivided into several formations and constitute the lower part of the volcanic sequence of the Norilsk area [53,55], i.e., Syverminsky, Gudchikhinsky, Khakanchansky, Tuklonsky and Nadezhdinsky formations.
Intrusive bodies occupy up to 30% of the volume of sedimentary rocks. They were attributed to several intrusive complexes based on the texture and structure of the rocks, petrography and a few whole-rock geochemical analyses. Although analytical data are insufficient, they were considered similar to the intrusive complexes typical of the Tunguska syneclise (Katangsky), the Norilsk area (Ergalakhsky, Norilsk) and local Kureysky complex.
Intrusions are represented by sill-like bodies (with a thickness of 5–6 to 50 m and a length of up to 10–15 km), located mostly in sedimentary rocks. Rare dikes also cut the volcanic rocks. The Imangdinsky–Letninsky and Khalilsky faults (Figure 3) controlled intrusion of magmas.
Intrusive bodies consist of olivine gabbro-dolerites or gabbro and leucogabbro. High-magnesian rocks occur in differentiated intrusions as distinct horizons and do not form separate bodies.
The authors have obtained the first modern geochemical data on magmatic rocks of this area including their isotopic characteristics. The results allowed subdividing intrusive rocks more correctly than it was done previously.

4. Objects and Methods

The authors studied igneous rocks in three sites within the Kulyumber river valley, i.e., the Khalil, Kaya and Kulyumber (Figure 3). Here we discuss the magmatic rocks of the two first sites (Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5). Data on the rocks from the Kulyumber site will be discussed in the second part of the article. The studied rocks were compared with the rocks of the Norilsk district and volcanic rocks of the Lama Lake area (Figure 1), which has a similar tectonic position between the Tunguska syneclise and the Norilsk–Igarka paleorift zone. The total list includes 57 samples (Tables 2 and 5).
Major and trace element concentrations in the rocks were determined using X-ray fluorescence (XRF) at the Institute of Geology of Ore Deposits, Petrography, Mineralogy and Geochemistry of Russian Academy of Science (IGEM RAS), Moscow, Russia (analyst A.I. Yakushev), and inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) at Institute of Microelectronics Technology and High Purity Materials RAS (IMT RAS), Chernogolovka Russia (analyst V.K. Karandashev). The latter method has been described earlier [56].
Sr, Nd and Pb isotopes were studied in representative samples from volcanic rocks at A.P. Karpinsky Russian Geological Research Institute (VSEGEI), St. Petersburg, Russia (analyst B.V. Belyatsky). Chemical separation of elements was carried out by chromatographic method on ion exchange columns according to the method described earlier [57] and the procedure of isotopes measurement was described in [57].
Compositions of rock-forming minerals were analyzed using an electron microprobe CAMECA SX 100 at Vernadsky Institute of Geochemistry and Analytical Chemistry of RAS (analyst N.N. Kononkova) and at Institute of Geology of Ore Deposits, Petrography, Mineralogy and Geochemistry of RAS with the aid JEOL JXA 8200 (analyst V. Taskaev) at a 30-nA beam and 20-kV accelerating voltage. The count time was 20 s, probe diameter −1 micron. Standard samples are San Carlos (olivine-Fe, MgKα, Ni), natural minerals sanidine (Si, Al, K), spessartin (Mn), anorthite (Ca), albite (NaKα), chromite (CrKα), F-phlogopite (F), ilmenite (Ti), (in brackets-analytical line used). Element concentrations were calculated using the ZAF correction method.

5. Results

5.1. Volcanic Rocks

Volcanic rocks (mainly lavas and tuffs) occur in the eastern part of the area, within the Nirungdinsky trough (Figure 3). Five formations were recognized: Syverminsky, Gudchikhinsky, Khakanchansky, Tuklonsky and Nadezhdinsky. We studied in detail the structure and composition of the lower part of the lavas sequence in the Khalil site, Section 1 (Figure 4) and compare it with the lower part of the volcanic section in the eastern Norilsk area, Section 2, Lake Lama. Several samples were also analyzed at the Kaya site (Figure 5).

5.1.1. Structure of Tuff-Lava Sequence and Petrography of Volcanic Rocks

The volcanic Section 1 (Figure 4, points X-20–X-27) in the Khalil site (Figure 6) begins with the Syverminsky formation which consists of eight lava flows (total thickness of 140 m). The flows have an average thickness of 10–15 m. They are overlain by olivine basalts of the Gudchikhinsky formation. Two sills cut these basalts.
The Syverminsky formation comprises middle-size grained aphyric lavas and tuffs. Poikilophytic varieties dominate in the lower part of the Syverminsky formation while its upper part mostly consists of tholeiitic basalts (Figure 7a,b). Poikilophytic structure characterizes the three lower flows of the section where large clinopyroxene oikocrysts (0.5 mm) comprise elongated plagioclase chadacrysts. Tholeiitic basalts consist of plagioclase (40–55 vol.%), clinopyroxene (15–40 vol.%), volcanic glass (5–15 vol.%), Fe-Ti oxides (1–3 vol.%). Sometimes they are enriched in titanite (Figure 8a,d). Glass is devitrified (Figure 8a,b) and altered (opacitated) and pallagonite occurs in groundmass (Figure 7a and Figure 8a). Secondary minerals are chlorite, amphibole. Margins of flows are represented by fine-grained amygdaloidal basalts (Figure 7b). Plagioclase comprises 52–70 mol% An; clinopyroxene composition varies in narrow range (Wo36–38En46–47Fs15–16); this mineral contains up to, in wt.%, TiO2:0.52, MnO:0.31, Al2O3:3.63, Cr:0.25 (Table 1).
The maximum thickness of pyroclastic rocks was found on the eastern side of the Khalil river valley. They occur as tuff horizons (first meters thick) or form extrusions consisting of tuff-lavas breccias. A paleovolcano was found in the riverbed of the left tributary of r. Khalil (Figure 4). Its diameter is 300–350 m and its height ranges from 20 to 30 m. It consists of agglomerate tuffs and tuff breccias with fragments of basalts and sedimentary rocks from 5–6 cm to 0.5–0.8 m. Vitro–lithoclastic tuff (Figure 7c,d and Figure 8e) consists of glass (40%–60%), pyroxene, plagioclase, potassium feldspar and calcite.
The Gudchikhinsky volcanic rocks are represented by olivine-bearing basalts with aphyric texture (Figure 7c,d) in contrary to the similar rocks located in the Norilsk area where they are usually porphyric (with plagioclase and olivine phenocrysts). They are fine- or middle-size grained with vitrophyric and micro-ophitic structure. Plagioclase (0.2–0.3 mm in length; 40–60 vol.%; An60) and clinopyroxene (0.1 mm; 25–40 vol.%; Mg# = 70) are the main rock-forming minerals, there is minor olivine (0.05–0.1 mm; Fo70–73) 2–3 vol.% and glass–1%–2%. Opaque minerals are Cr-magnetite, ilmenite. Secondary minerals are chlorite, amphibole and prehnite. Compositions of rock-forming minerals are given in Table 1.
We compared the tuff-lava sequence of Section 1 (Figure 6a) with the lower sequence of volcanic rocks of the north coast of Lake Lama located in the eastern Norilsk area (Section 2). Early we payed particular attention to the middle part of the volcanic sequence, i.e., formations overlapping the Ivakinsky formation in the Khalil area should be underlined (Figure 6b). The Syverminsky basalts lie on the sedimentary rocks of the Tunguska Group (C2–P2) and are overlain by basalts of the Gudchikhinsky formation everywhere around the Kulyumber area. The thickness of the Syverminsky formation in both sections is similar (140 and 160 m, respectively). The Lake Lama section consists of 9 flows of tholeiitic basalts overlapped by two flows of poikilophytic basalts. The Gudchikhinsky formation in the Lama Lake area consists of picrites [36] or picritic basalts attributed to the middle subformation while in the Khalil area it is represented by olivine basalts (lower subformation).
The studied volcanic rocks of the Kaya site coming from the bottom of the tuff-lava section. They belong to the Syverminsky formation and are represented by tholeiitic and poikilophytic basalts similar to the rocks of Section 1.

5.1.2. Geochemistry of Volcanic Rocks

Major elements. Chemical compositions of the volcanic rocks from the Khalil and Kaya sites of the Kulyumber area and Norilsk area are given in Table 2. Figure 9 shows diagram (SiO2–Na2O+K2O) of the analyzed rocks.
Yellow, light brown and brown circles are rocks of the Syverminsky formation from different areas (Kylyumber–Khalil and Kaya sites, Norilsk–Lake Lama, respectively). They show a wide range of compositions belonging to basalt, basaltic andesite, trachybasalt, basaltic trachyandesite and trachyandesite (Figure 9). Most of the samples are concentrated in the basaltic andesite and basaltic trachyandesite fields: these rocks have similar SiO2 content (Figure 9 and Figure 10a) but differ in alkalis concentrations. Rocks compositions of the Syverminsky formation of the Khalil area plot separately due to their enrichment in alkalis as compared with the rocks from the Kaya site and the Norilsk area (Section 2) and even with the Ivakinsky formation from Section 2. Figure 10 demonstrates the difference in alkalis between the Syverminsky rocks of the Khalil, Kaya and Norilsk area (Figure 10g,h) and the Khalil area rocks being higher in Na2O whereas K2O and P2O5 contents are similar for all three areas (Figure 10f–h). Concentrations of other oxides in the Syverminsky rocks from different areas are very similar (Figure 10b–e).
We have studied only one sample from the Gudchikhinsky formation in the Khalil site (Section 1), which was compared with two samples from the same formation in the Norilsk area (green triangles in Figure 9). This sample of the Gudchikhinsky formation correlates with the rocks of the lower part of this formation in the Norilsk area (lower subformation, T1gd1) represented by basalts. The basalts of the Khalil area show MgO = 7.96 wt.%) and Na2O and K2O (2.80 wt.% and 1.33 wt.%, respectively) (Figure 10g,h). These alkaline contents are not typical of the Gudchikhinsky formation in the Norilsk area (Table 2, Nos 23 and 24) where the total alkali content do not exceed 1.5 wt.%.
Tuffs compositions fall in the field of andesite and basaltic andesite (Figure 9, red symbols). They are characterized by low TiO2 and high Al2O3. We attributed pyroclastic rocks to different formations based on trace element distribution (see later).
Trace elements. The patterns of trace elements for the Syverminsky rocks of both sections and of rocks outcropping in the Kaya river valley (Figure 11a; Table 2) are characterized by enrichment in LILE, negative Ta-Nb and positive Pb anomalies and elevated (Gd/Yb)n ratio close to 1.8–1.9. The compositions of trachybasalts of the Kaya site (samples 3.20–3.23) are quite homogenous and are absolutely similar to the Syverminsky rocks of Lake Lama area (samples 4270). A wide range of compositions characterizes the trachybasalts of the Khalil site. Despite the similar topology of patterns, they have large Pb and Sr anomalies in comparison with the samples of other areas.
There is a difference between the rocks of the Gudchikhinsky formation of the Khalil and Norilsk areas in trace elements. The Khalil rocks contain less Th and U in comparison with the similar rocks of the Norilsk area where there is essential variations in the content of many elements [27], but the Th and U content do not almost change. Thus, the low Th and U concentrations are a specific feature of the Gudchikhinsky basalts of the Khalil area (Figure 11b).
We studied two tuff samples, one is located in the tuff horizon (X-0) and the second one was taken from the volcanic structure outcropping in the Khalil site (X-37). They have similar compositions in term of major components (high SiO2 content) but different rare elements distributions that allowed us to attribute them to different formations (Figure 11c). Sample X-37 is characterized by a deep slope of the right part of the pattern with (Gd/Yb)n = 1.9 and was attributed to the Syverminsky formation. Sample X-0 has a different pattern (with low (Gd/Yb)n = 1.5) and belongs to the Khakanchansky formation.

5.1.3. Isotope Composition of Volcanic Rocks

We have analyzed eight samples from the Khalil and Norilsk areas, mostly from the Syverminsky formation. The Gudchikhinsky picrites and Khakanchansky tuffs and Tuklonsky basalts have also been analyzed analyzed (Table 3, Figure 12).
Data for flood basalts demonstrate a wide range of Nd-, Sr-isotopic compositions, these variations are typical of the Siberian trap province [30,31,61].

5.2. Intrusive Rocks

5.2.1. General Characteristic of Intrusive Rocks

Intrusions represent almost the 10% of the studied area (Figure 3). They are represented by sills or sill-like bodies located in sedimentary rocks (Devonian and Tunguska Group, C2-P2), i.e., they extend in submeridional (N–S) direction at 15–20 km and fall to the east at 10°–12° of the Nirungdinsky trough’s center. Several intrusive bodies form dikes, which cut volcanic rocks. The thickness of intrusions varies from 5–10 m to 150 m. The attribution of the intrusive rocks of the studied area to the intrusive plutonic complexes of the literature is a problem that is not easy to solve. The location of the territory on the border of the two tectonic structures (Figure 1) has led to emplacement of many intrusive bodies that are typical of both environments. According to the Legend to the Geological Map [62] this area comprises 3 complexes: Ergalakhsky (typical of the Norilsk area), Katangsky (typical of the Tunguska syneclise) and Kureysky (located between Kulyumber and Kureyka rivers). The intrusive bodies of these complexes have similar morphology, texture and composition. It is very difficult to distinguish between them without a detailed geochemical study. Traditionally coarse–grained and olivine gabbro-dolerites (with elevated MgO = 8–9 wt.%) were combined into the Kureysky complex while middle-grained olivine-bearing and olivine-free gabbro-dolerites were attributed to the Katangsky complex.
These three types of intrusive rocks, Ergalakhsky, Kureysky and Katangsky, were found at the Khalil site during the geological mapping (Figure 4). They are roughly equal in percentage. Bodies of the Ergalakhsky complex are localized along the valley of the stream Khalil (Intrusion 1 in Figure 4). A dike-like body of submeridional (N–S) direction located in volcanic rocks was named as the Khalil intrusion and attributed to the Kureysky complex (Intrusion 2 in Figure 4). It is 100–500-m thick, dips to the east (angles 45°–75°) and consists of gabbro-dolerites and leucogabbro-dolerites in the hanging side. One intrusive body, earlier attributed to the Katangsky complex, was attributed by us to the Norilsk complex based on its geochemical composition, which is close to the Norilsk complex (intrusion 3 in Figure 4). Several small subconcordant and nonconcordant intrusive bodies of the Katangsky complex were recognized in the Khalil and Kaya sites (Intrusion 4 in Figure 4; in Section 1, sample X-21, Figure 6).

5.2.2. Petrography of Intrusive Rocks

Ergalakhsky complex is represented by sills and sill-like bodies mostly concordant with sedimentary rocks of the Tunguska Group (Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5). The bodies have thickness 10–20 m and length 3–5 km. They consist of trachydolerites (Figure 13; samples X-40, X-43, X-48, intrusion number 1 in Figure 4). The main rock-forming minerals are plagioclase (40–60 vol.%), clinopyroxene (35%–40%. titan-augite) orthopyroxene (0–3%), olivine (1% Magnetite, zircon, apatite are accessory minerals. Small bodies and contact zones of large sills are composed of fine-grained rocks with dolerite structure formed by differently oriented radial laths of plagioclase (0.2–0.3 mm) (60%–70%) and isometric grains of pyroxene (20%–35%) and rare olivine (0.05–0.1 mm, 5%–10%) (Figure 13a). The central part of large bodies consists of medium-coarse-grained rocks with poikilophytic structure (Figure 13b). The composition of minerals varies within the following ranges: plagioclase An39–53, clinopyroxene Wo41–43 En35–39 Fs18–22; Ol = Fo42–52 (Table 4).
Kureysky complex. Here we consider a large dike-like massif in the Khalil site which was previously attributed to the Kureysky complex. It was named the Khalil intrusion during geological mapping of this area [62] (Figure 4, intrusion 2). It consists of middle-, large-grained olivine gabbro-dolerites and gabbro-dolerites. The main minerals are olivine, clinopyroxene, plagioclase; rare minerals include biotite, magnetite and apatite. The composition of olivine (Figure 9, Table 3) changes from Fo49 to Fo56. The CaO (up to 0.32 wt.%) and Ni (0.05–0.17 wt.%) contents are low. This composition is strongly different from olivine of the ore-bearing intrusions of the Norilsk area, in particular the Norilsk 1 intrusion studied by us in the core of borehole DM-27 (the second part of this article) as well as from available data in the literature [63,64,65]. Clinopyroxene is more stable in composition: the Mg# ranges in interval 64–74. The admixture of chromium in it is practically absent (at the level of sensitivity of the EPMA method) and TiO2 content does not exceed 1 wt.%. Maximum concentrations (wt.%): Al2O3—2.25, Na2O—0.40. The composition of plagioclase varies from An56 to An70. Magnetite contains 12–14 wt.% TiO2. The mineral composition of the Khalil intrusion was studied in the samples X-35 and X-19 (Table 4).
The reference object of the Kureysky complex is the Dzhaltulsky massif located several kilometers south of the Kulyumber area. We have analyzed samples from the borehole OKG-13. Olivine from one sample corresponds to the average value of the olivine compositions in the Kylyumber massif: it is characterized by very low concentrations of calcium and nickel (0.07–0.17 wt.% CaO and 0.03–0.06 wt.% NiO) at the same Fo72–73 of the mineral. Pyroxene is more magnesian-rich (Mg# = 77–78).
Intrusions of the Katangsky complex are usually composed of fine-medium-grained homogeneous gabbro-dolerites and olivine-bearing gabbro-dolerites. They have usually a dolerite, poikilophytic structure where plagioclase laths (0.1–0.3 microns) are enclosed in large grains of pyroxene (1–1. 5 mm). The composition of olivine in olivine gabbro-dolerites (sample X-15) is close to the olivine composition from the Kureysky complex but differs in higher nickel contents (up to 0.19 for Fo73; it is close in composition to olivine from the Norilsk 1 intrusion. Plagioclase changes from An56 to An70. The Mg# number of clinopyroxene varies from 53 to 73 and orthopyroxene from 58 to 69. Magnetite contains 12–14 wt.% TiO2. The mineral composition of the Khalil intrusion was studied in the sample X-19 and X-35 (Table 4). The compositions of rock-forming minerals from the Katangsky complex will be described in the second part of the article.

5.2.3. Chemical Composition of Intrusive Rocks

The compositions of the different intrusive complexes are given in Table 5 and illustrated in Figure 14. Trachydolerites of the Ergalakhsky complex (Intrusion 1) differ from the other rocks in higher SiO2, P2O5, Na2O and especially in TiO2 and K2O contents (up to 2.5 wt.%. Figure 12e–g) whereas rocks from the other complexes contain less than 1 wt.% K2O, and low SiO2., MgO and CaO concentrations.
Low MgO contents (<10 wt.%) characterize all studied samples excluding one sample of picritic gabbro-dolerite from the Norilsk 1 intrusion (24.5 wt.% MgO). This sample contains sulfide mineralization and, due to high sulfide content, has high Fe and low CaO and alkalis’ concentrations. The Norilsk 1 intrusion is characterized by wide compositional range because it consists of different rocks that form separate layers within the intrusive body. These rocks are enriched in Al2O3 and depleted in MnO, TiO2 and Fe2O3 in comparison with the other intrusions of the Khalil site excepting the intrusive body 3. There is a good correlation between rocks from the Norilsk 1 and Intrusion 3 (Figure 4) for all major elements—TiO2, SiO2, alkalis and P2O5. Only CaO content in gabbro-dolerites in the Intrusion 3 is slightly lower than that in the Norilsk 1 intrusion. We attributed this Intrusion 3 to the Norilsk intrusive complex (Norilsk-type). In both cases the lower contents of TiO2 in the Norilsk 1 intrusion and Intrusion 3 are typical of the Norilsk complex. According to numerous data, the TiO2 concentration from the Norilsk 1 intrusion is 0.87 wt.%, i.e., <1% [8,40,66].
Most interesting is the comparison of the compositions of the Kureysky and Katangsky complexes; these complexes are the most common in this area. They consist of gabbro-dolerites belonging to rocks of normal alkalinity (less than for the Ergalakhsky rocks). Figure 14 shows their identical composition in major components and their difference with the Ergalakhsky intrusion. Only Na2O contents are higher in respect to the rocks of the Katangsky complex. Probably, due to alteration of the Katangsky rocks.
The large Dzhaltulsky massif is considered as a reference intrusion of the Kureysky complex. We used three samples from this massif to compare these rocks with other intrusions of the Kulyumber area. Our data show that the Dzhaltulsky massif differs from both the Kureysky and Katangsky intrusions by low TiO2, alkalis, Fe2O3 and high MgO, Al2O3, CaO. Thus, we believe that intrusions attributed to the Kureysky complex in the Khalil site belong to the Katangsky complex because they differ of the Dzhaltulsky massif in all major elements.
The distribution of trace elements in rocks of different complexes is shown in a series of spider diagrams (Figure 15) and on binary diagrams (Figure 16).
In Figure 15 the intrusive rocks show two distinct compositional patterns: (1) enrichment in LILE with small Ta-Nb negative anomaly and depletion in other HFSE and REE elements (Ergalakhsky complex; Figure 15a); (2) strong negative Ta-Nb and Sr anomalies and minor depletion in other HFSE and REE elements (Figure 15b–f). The second pattern has some differences between intrusions. The greatest variation in the content of trace elements characterizes the Norilsk 1 massif (Figure 15b) due to different olivine content of the rock: the most depleted patterns are typical of the picritic gabbro-dolerites. The patterns of the Katangsky and Kureysky (Khalil intrusion) complexes are very close to each other (Figure 15c,d). Rocks of the Dzhaltulsky massif are the most depleted in all incompatible elements. Intrusive body of the Norilsk-type (intrusion 3 in Figure 4) approaches to the composition of the Dzhaltulsky massif (Figure 15e,f).
Ratios of indicator elements detect differences between intrusions of the second type. The (Gd/Yb)n and (La/Sm) n ratios reflect the slope steepness of the right and central parts of the patterns (Figure 16a), whereas the (La/Yb)n ratio characterizes the pattern inclination. To use these indicator element ratios see we did not consider samples of the Ergalakhsky complex in Figure 16a because much higher values of these ratios characterize them. This diagram shows that the (U/Nb)n ratio is only significant difference between them (Figure 16b). The highest values are typical of the Khalil intrusion presumably assigned to the Kureysky complex. However, the Dzhaltulsky massif, which is considered the rock-type of this complex, is characterized by the lowest values of the (U/Nb)n ratio. Intrusion 3 defined preliminarily as Norilsk-type intrusion is close to the Dzhaltulsky massif according to this parameter. Therefore, the (U/Nb)n ratio allows separating intrusions of the different complexes.
Comparison of rocks from different massifs in term of ore elements (excluding rocks with rich sulfide mineralization) indicates their same content of metals such as vanadium and chromium (Figure 17a), nickel and copper (Figure 17b), excepting the Ergalakhsky complex, which is depleted in these metals.

6. Discussion

6.1. Volcanic Rocks

For the first time we have studied in detail the igneous rocks outside the Norilsk district using the modern geochemical methods. The volcanic rocks of the Kulyumber river valley have been previously subdivided into several formations similar to the formations of the Norilsk region (Table 5, [55]). The Ivakinsky formation is absent in the Nirungdinsky trough. Its composition studied in the Lama Lake area (Section 2) corresponds to the composition of the Ivakinsky rocks in the Kharaelakh trough [29,32]. The Syverminsky formation has been studied also in two sites of the Kulyumber river valley, the Khail and Kaya. Our data allowed to conclude that this formation varies along its stretch. Although the textural and structural features of rocks vary slightly, their chemical composition change significantly. In the Norilsk region (Lama Lake, Section 2), the rocks show a constant homogeneous composition, with small variations in the concentrations of the major elements such as MgO-5–6 wt.%, TiO2–1.6–2 wt.%, alkalis-2.6–3.7. Similar variations of these elements have been found in the Kharaelakh trough [29] and Sunduk mountain [32]. Within the Kulyumber river valley, the contents of major oxides in rocks change more significantly. Trachydolerites of Section 1 contain (wt.%): MgO = 3.4–6.9, TiO2 = 1.2–1.8, alkalis = 5.2–6.3, whereas those (samples 3-2-2 and 3-3-3) at the Khalil significantly differ showing low magnesium (3.4 wt.% MgO) and high alkalis (up to 7.1 Na2O + K2O wt.%) content. Probably, these differences are due to secondary alterations of the rocks as suggested by the presence of many pyrite crystals. The homogenous compositions are typical of the Syverminsky rocks with respect to the La/Sm, Gd/Yb and U/Nb ratios, especially of the rocks at the Nirungdinsky trough.
The Gudchikhinsky formation in the Norilsk region is subdivided into three subformations [14,55] that differ in composition. They are represented by porphyry basalts, picrites and glomeroporphyritic basalts, respectively. Picrites of the middle subformation are the most stable along the stretch, while the basalts of the lower and upper subformations pinch out from the west to east. The studied sample from the Kulyumber river valley corresponds to the rocks of the lower subformation, although it differs from them in its aphyric texture. The Gudchikhinsky rocks (lower and middle subformations) were studied within the Kharaelakh [29] and Norilsk [67] troughs. The studied basalts of the Khalil site contain more MgO (8 wt.%) in comparison with similar basalts of the Norilsk region, where the Gudchikhinsky basalts contain 6.3 ± 0.5 wt.% in average (67 analyses, [68]). Similar data were obtained for basalts in the Kharaelakh trough, where MgO varies in narrow range of 6–7 wt.%, The basalts of the lower subformation of the Gudchikhinsky formation in the Norilsk trough (boreholes OM-6 and OM-25, [67]) show less magnesium content, with MgO ranges from 4.3 wt.% to 4.8 wt.%.
The trace element ratios show the differences between the rocks of the studied areas more clearly. The (Gd/Yb)n ratio reflecting the inclination of the right part of patterns changes from 2.0 to 2.3 in rocks of the Norilsk area and it is close to the ratio established for the Gudchikhinsky rocks in the Khalil site (2.0). The La/Sm ratio is more variable, and it demonstrates the differences between rocks of the Gudchikhinsky formation located in the different tectonic structures of the Norilsk area. The picrites of the Kharaelkh trough are characterized by values of 1.3–1.5, while basalts have 1.5–1.7. The highest difference between basalts of the lower subformation and picrites of the middle subformation occurs in the rocks of the Norilsk rough, where they are characterized by (La/Sm)n ratio of 2.2 and 1.3–1.7, respectively. The U/Nb ratio has a wide range in the Gudchikhinsky rocks. The basalts of the Norilsk trough have low ratio (1.4), while the picrites have (U/Nb)n = 2.0–4.0. The difference between basalts and picrites within the Kharaelakh trough is also significant, 0.9 for basalts and 1.7–2.2 for picrites. These values are very close to the values that we obtained for basalts of the Nirungdinsky trough (0.7) and for picrites of the eastern part of the Norilsk area (1.8 and 2.4).
The Khakanchansky formation consists of tuffs. The data on the Khakanchansky rocks in literature are restricted in comparison with the data on other formations. Previously we described these rocks from the upper part of Section 2 [58], Lama Lake area and in the Norilsk trough [67]. The contents of major elements in tuffs vary significantly but the distribution of trace elements and their ratios are quite homogenous (La/Sm)n = 2.3–3.3, (Gd/Yb)n = 1.5–1.6, (U/Nb)n = 4.7–6. The composition of tuff from the Khalil area is close to the compositions of tuffs in the Norilsk area (excepting U/Nb). Published data on the composition of the Khakanchansky rocks at the Khantayskoe Lake [69] significantly differ in the La/Sm ratio, which varies from 1.5 to 1.8. According to our data, similar values are typical of the Tuklonsky formation, so it is likely that these tuffs belong to this formation.
In summary, the obtained geochemical data on the volcanic rocks in the Kulyumber river valley allows us to attribute them to the known formations despite some variations in their compositions.

6.2. Intrusive Rocks

The diagnostic of intrusive rocks in the Kulyumber river valley is inconveniently due to their similar texture and structure and close chemical composition. Preliminary attribution to intrusive complexes is based on the morphology and inner structure of intrusive bodies. Geological map [53] indicates that three intrusive complexes occur in this area, i.e., Ergalakhsky, Katangsky and Kureysky. We have studied four main intrusions in the Khalil site (Figure 4) and two intrusions from the Norilsk area (the Norilsk 1) and Kureyka river valley (the Dzhaltulsky massif) representing the Norilsk and the Kureysky complexes. To compare these intrusions between them and with standard Norilsk and Kureysky complexes we used the same parameters as we used for the volcanic rocks (Table 6 and Table 7).
Fabric of the intrusive rocks belonging to different complexes are similar and are typical of the igneous rocks crystallized near the surface (subvolcanic bodies). Poikilophytic texture dominates and dolerite texture is widespread. Compositions of rock-forming minerals reflect the composition of primary magmas that formed the intrusive bodies. The most magnesium minerals (olivines, pyroxens) are typical of the intrusions with high MgO contents, i.e., Norilsk 1 and Dzhaltulsky massifs. Plagioclases demonstrate a huge range of compositions, so the comparison of different intrusive bodies in the respect of this mineral needs a large number of analyses. We believe that chemical compositions of rocks allow better to distinguish intrusions.
The composition of major elements in the intrusions demonstrates the essential difference between the Ergalakhsky complex and the other rocks. The intrusion of the Ergalakhsky complex contains very low MgO (3.1wt.%) and high TiO2 (2.4 wt.%) and alkalis (5.4 wt.%). Three intrusions have similar compositions in respect of these elements (high MgO, low TiO2 and Na2O + K2O), they are the Norilsk 1 intrusion, the Dzhaltulsky massif. Although the Intrusion 3 in the Khalil site is not differentiated, we referred it to the Norilsk complex based on major elements contents. The Intrusion 2 preliminary attributed to the Kureysky complex differs from the Dzhaltulsky massif (standard object of this complex) in lower MgO and higher TiO2 and it is close to the Katangsky complex (Intrusion 4) in respect of these elements. The comparison of the studied intrusive bodies in trace elements shows the principle difference between the Ergalakhsky complex and the other complexes as well. The rocks of the Ergalakhsky complex are characterized by very high Gd/Yb and especially La/Yb ratios reflecting the patterns inclination to X axis. The rocks of the other complexes have no such dramatical differences and form one range of compositions with varying characteristics (trace element ratios). There is no intrusive bodies in the Kulyumber river valley which is in a good correlation with the Dzhaltulsky massif. We concluded that the intrusions preliminary attributed to the Kureysky complex are similar to the intrusions of the Katangsky complex.
This aspect of the subdivision of magmatic rocks in the Kulyumber river valley will be regarded in the next part of the article where many intrusions of the Katangsky complex are widespread.

6.3. Magmatic Evolution

The geochemistry of igneous rocks located within the Kulyumber area demonstrates their origin from two principally different primary magmas. The first type of magmas has a mantle source which produced the volcanic rocks of the Gudchikhinsky formation. These rocks are characterized by high MgO content in comparison with the other volcanic rocks and absence of Ta-Nb negative and Pb positive anomalies, high εNd (+4) and low 87Sr/86Sr (0.704). These isotope characteristics allow to attribute the Gudchikhinsky rocks to products of mantle magmas. We previously studied the compositions of these magmas in the Gudchikhinsky picrites of the Norilsk area on the basis of data on melt inclusions in olivines [27]. We highlighted that the magma composition changes from the east to the west in the Norilsk area varying from a primitive mantle composition to a mantle enriched in the crustal material (up to 10%). The parental magma contains 12–14 wt.% MgO and was undersaturated in water. It crystallized near surface at T−1200 °C. Based on high Ni in olivine it was suggested that pyroxenite was a source for this magma [36]. The Gudchikhinsky basalts of the Kulymber valley river show similar geochemical features of the rocks of the Norilsk area but they enriched in LREE (La, Sm especially) and contain very low U and Th. Thus, there is an evolution of magma composition not only in sub latitudinal direction but also in sub meridional from the Norilsk area to the Kulyumber river. This type of magma is an analog of the Hawaiian tholeiites and represent an OIB source (Ocean Island Basalts) [27]. There was not found intrusive analogs of the Gudchikhinsky volcanic rocks within the Khalil and Kaya sites while they were found in the Norilsk area (the Fokinsky intrusive complex [31]).
The second type of magmas is substantially different from that which formed the Gudchikhinsky rocks. These type of magmas combines magmas of many volcanic and intrusive rocks in the Kulyumber area. It is characterized by negative Ta-Nb, positive Pb anomalies and very low εNd (up to −4) and high 87Sr/86Sr (reaching up 0.707) that reflect a crustal origin (WPB). It was suggested [29,30,31,32] that a sublithospheric mantle contaminated by the crust material (at 25–30 wt.%) is the source magma for these rocks. We recognized two different rock groups formed by this way. The first group combine the Syverminsky trakhybasalts and Ergalakhsky intrusive rocks while the second group comprises the volcanic rocks of the Khakanchansky, Tuklonsky and Nadezhdinsky formations and intrusions of the Katangsky, Kureysky and Norilsk complexes. The rocks of the second group were crystallized from tholeiitic magmas of normal or with relevantly high magnesium (MgO = 6−8 wt.%) at T—1200–1250 °C and contain <1% H2O [70,71]. The magmas that formed the intrusions in the Kulyumber river valley are characterized by high TiO2 (1.3–2.0) in comparison with the magmas of the Norilsk area where only the Daldykansky rocks have similar TiO2 contents. During the magmatic evolution the TiO2 content increased with time in the Norilsk area (as shown by the volcanic rock sequence, [72] and, partially by the intrusive rocks). On the basis of these data we suggest that the intrusive bodies of the Kulyumber area were formed at the end of the magmatic evolution within the Siberian platform while volcanic rocks are in good agreement with the volcanic rocks of the Norilsk are and coeval with them.
Thus, we suggest the occurrence of both type of magmatism–rift (OIB) and platform (WPB) in the Kulyumber area.

7. Conclusions

  • Geochemical and mineralogical data on the volcanic rocks in the Khalil and Kaya sites of the Kulyumber area allow their attribution to the Syverminsky, Gudchikhinsky, Khakanchansky, Tuklonsky and Nadezhdinsky formations. No rocks of the Ivakinsky formation were found in the studied area, which pinches out to the south from the Norilsk area. Thus, volcanic rocks of the Syverminsky formation overlap sub-concordantly the terrigenous deposits of the Tunguska Group.
  • The composition of the Guchikhinskiy formation changes from the Norilsk district to the Kulyumber river valley: rocks are enriched in alkalis (up to 4.3 wt.% in total) in the Khalil area (in comparison with 1.15% in the Norilsk area) and depleted in the Th and U contents, respectively. These data reflect an evolution of the formation within the Norilsk–Igarka paleo rift zone.
  • Four intrusive complexes were recognized within the Khalil area, including Ergalakhsky, Kureysky, Katangsky and Norilsk. The latter is represented by one dyke-like body of gabbro-dolerites attributed to the Norilsk complex on the basis of it low TiO2 and high Cr contents although the (U/Nb)n ratio is low.
A detailed analysis of intrusive rocks and discussion on their origin is given in the second part of the article devoted to the study of rocks of the southern part of the territory (the Kulyumber site), where igneouse products dominate over volcanic. The petrographic and geochemical study allowed their better attribution to the various intrusive complexes recognized in this area of the Siberian province.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, N.K. and A.D.; analyses, methodology and writing, B.B.; field investigation, B.G. and A.L.; preparation, formal analysis and English Editing, K.M.; formal analysis, V.T. and N.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was financially supported by Russian Foundation for Basic Research, projects Nos 18-05-70094, 19-05-00654; and the state budget research (No. AAAA-A18-118052590026-5).

Acknowledgments

We thanks I. Sidorenko, M. Nesterenko for their help in field trip; E.Krasnova for diagram constrants and E.Beskova for samples preparation to microprobe study. We are very grateful to R. Ernst, S, Diakov and unknown reviewers for their comments and helpful recommendations that improved the manuscript including the English language.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Coffin, M.F.; Eldholm, O. Scratching the surface: Estimating dimensions of Large igneous provinces. Geophysics 1993, 21, 515–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Coffin, M.F.; Eldholm, O. Large igneous provinces. Crustal structure, dimensions and external consequences. Rev. Geoghys. 1994, 32, 1–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ernst, R.E. Large Igneous Provinces; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2014; Volume 7. [Google Scholar]
  4. Campbell, I. Mantle Plume, Planetary. In Encyclopedia of Astrobiology; Gargaud, M., Amilis, R., Cernicharo Quintanilla, J., Cleaves, H.J., Irvin, W.M., Piniti, D.L., Viso, M., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Jonesa, T.D.; DaviesaI, D.R.; Campbell, I.; Wilsonb, C.R.; Kramerc, S.C. Do mantle plumes preserve the heterogeneous structure of their deep-mantle source? Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2016, 434, 10–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Zolotukhin, V.V.; Vilensky, A.M.; VasilievYu, R.; Dyuzhikov, O.A. Magnesium Basic Rocks of Western Part of the Siberian Platform and Problems of Nickel Potential; Nauka: Novosibirsk, Russia, 1984; p. 208. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  7. Zolotukhin, V.V.; Vilensky, A.M.; Dyuzhikov, O.A. Basalts of the Siberian Platform; Nauka: Novosibirsk, Russia, 1986; p. 245. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  8. Godlevsky, M.N. Traps and Ore-Bearing Intrusion; Gosgeoltekhizdat: Moscow, Russia, 1959; p. 61. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  9. Egorov, V.N.; Sukhanova, E.N. Talnakh ore-bearing intrusion in NW Siberian platform. Explor. Prot. Nat. Resour. 1963, 1, 17–21. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  10. Dyuzhikov, O.A.; Distler, V.V.; Strunin, B.M.; Mkrtychyan, A.K.; Sherman, M.L.; Sluzhenikin, S.F.; Lurye, A.M. Geology and Ore Potential of the Norilsk Ore District; Nauka: Moscow, Russia, 1988; p. 238. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  11. Distler, V.V.; Grokhovskaya, T.L.; Evstigneeva, T.L.; Sluzhenikin, S.F.; Filimonova, A.A.; Dyuzhikov, O.A. Petrology of Magmatic Sulfide Ore Formation; Nauka: Moscow, Russia, 1988; p. 232. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  12. Likhachev, A.P. Kharaelakh intrusion and its Pt-Cu-Ni ores. Rudy I Met. 1998, 3, 48–62. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  13. Likhachev, A.P. Conditions of Cu-Ni deposits’ formation. Sov. Geol. 1982, 6, 31–46. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  14. Lul’ko, V.A.; Fedorenko, V.A.; Distler, V.V.; Sluzhenikin, S.F.; Kunilov, V.E.; Stekhin, A.I.; Ryabikin, V.A.; Simonov, O.N.; Zen’ko, T.E. Geology and Oredeposits of the Norilskregion; Guidebook VII IPS: Moscow-Norilsk, Russia, 1994; Volume 43. [Google Scholar]
  15. Likhachev, A.P. Platinum–Copper–Nickel and Platinum Deposits; Eslan: Moscow, Russia, 2006; p. 496. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  16. Ryabov, V.V.; Shevko, A.Y.; Gora, M.P. Trap Magmatism and Ore Formation in the Siberian Norilsk Region; Springer: Dordrecht, The Nederland, 2014; Volume 1–2. [Google Scholar]
  17. Krivolutskaya, N.A. Siberian Traps and Pt-Cu-Ni Deposits in the Norilsk Area; Springer: Amsterdam, The Netherland, 2016; p. 361. [Google Scholar]
  18. Black, B.A.; Elkins-Tanton, L.T.; Rowe, M.C.; Peate, I.U. Magnitude and consequence and volatile realise from the Siberian traps. Earth Planet Sci. Lett. 2012, 317–318, 363–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Schmidt, A.; Elkins-Tanton, L. Volcanism and Global Environmental Change, Special volume; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  20. Burgess, S.D.; Bowring, S.; Shen, S. High-precision timeline for Earth’s most sivere condition. In Proceedings of the National Academy of Science; National Academy of Sciences: Washington, DC, USA, 2014; Volume 111, pp. 3316–3321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Zolotukhin, V.V.; Vasil’ev, Y.R.; Dyuzhikov, O.A. Diversity of Traps and Initial Magmas: A Case of the Siberian Platform; Nauka: Novosibirsk, Russia, 1978; p. 289. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  22. Zolotukhin, V.V.; Al’mukhamedov, A.I. Basalts of the Siberian platform: Composition and mechanism of formation. In Traps of Siberia and Deccan: Similarities and differences; Nauka: Novosibirsk, Russia, 1991; pp. 7–39. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  23. Oleynikov, B.V.; Tomshin, M.D. Evolution of basic intrusive magmatism of the Siberian platform in time. In Traps of Siberia and Deccan: Similarities and Differences; Nauka: Novosibirsk, Russia, 1991; pp. 39–63. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  24. Dobretsov, N.L.; Vernikovsky, V.A. Mantle Plumes and Their Geologic Manifestations. Intern. Geol. Rev. 2001, 43, 771–787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Dobretsov, N.L.; Borisenko, A.S.; Izokh, A.E.; Zhmodik, S.M. Termochemical model of Permo-Triassic plume of Euroausia as a basement for genesis understanding and prospecting of copper-nickel, noble- and rare metals deposits. Rus. Geol. Geophys. 2010, 51, 1159–1180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Dobretsov, N.L.; Borisenko, A.S.; Izokh, A.E. Termochemical deep mantle plums as a source of ore potencial on the planet. Nauka Iz Pervykh Ruk 2011, 6, 37–43. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  27. Sobolev, A.V.; Kuzmin, D.V.; Krivolutskaya, N.A. Petrology of primary melts and mantle sources of the Siberian trap province. Petrology 2009, 17, 276–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Sobolev, A.V.; Slutsky, A.B. Composition and Crystallization Conditions of the Parental Melt of the Siberian Meymechites in Connection with the General Problem of Ultrabasic Magmas. Geol. Geophys. 1984, 12, 97–110. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  29. Lightfoot, P.C.; Naldrett, A.J.; Gorbachev, N.S.; Doherty, W.; Fedorenko, V.A. Geochemistry of the Siberian traps of the Norilsk area: With implications for the relative contributions of crust and mantle to flood basalts. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1990, 104, 631–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Wooden, J.L.; Czamanske, G.K.; Bouse, R.M.; King, B.-S.W.; Kknight, R.J.; Siems, D.F. Isotopic and trace-element constraints on mantle and crustal contributions to Siberian continental flood basalts, Norilsk area, Siberia. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1993, 57, 3677–3704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hawkesworth, C.J.; Lightfoot, P.C.; Fedorenko, V.A.; Balck, S.; Naldrett, A.J.; Doherty, W.; Gorbachev, N.S. Magma differentiation and mineralization in the Siberian flood basalts. Lithos 1995, 34, 61–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Lightfoot, P.C.; Naldrett, A.J.; Gorbachev, N.S.; Fedorenko, V.A.; Howkesworth, C.J.; Hergt, J.; Doherty, W. Chemostratigraphy of Siberian Trap Lavas, Noril’sk District: Implication for the Source of Flood Basalt Magmas and their Associated Ni-Cu Mineralization. In Proceeding of the Sudbary–Noril’sk Symposium; Ontario Geological Survey: Greater Sudbury, ON, Canada, 1994; pp. 283–312. [Google Scholar]
  33. Al’mukhamedov, A.I.; Medvedev, A.Y.; Zolotukhin, V.V. Evolutions of Permo-Triassic basalts of the Siberian Platform in time and space. Petrology 2004, 12, 339–353. [Google Scholar]
  34. Fedorenko, V.A.; Czamanske, G. Results of New Field and Geochemical Studies of the Volcanic Rocks of the Maymecha–Kotuy Area, Siberian Flood-Basalt Province, Russia. Intern. Geol. Rev. 1997, 39, 479–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Arndt, N.T.; Chauvel, C.; Czamanske, G.; Fedorenko, V.A. Two Mantle Sources, Two Plumbing Systems: Tholeiitic and Alkaline Magmatism of the Maymecha River Basin, Siberian Flood Volcanic Province. Contrib. Miner. Pet. 1998, 133, 279–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Sobolev, A.V.; Hofmann, A.J.; Kuzmin, D.V.; Yaxley, J.M.; Arndt, N.T.; Chung, S.L.; Danyushevsky, L.V.; Elliot, T.; Frey, F.A.; Garcia, M.O.; et al. The amount of Recycled Crust in Sources of Mantle-Derived Melts. Science 2007, 316, 412–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Sobolev, A.V.; Sobolev, S.V.; Kuzmin, D.V.; Malitch, K.N.; Petrunin, A.G. Siberian meimechites: Origin and relation to flood basalts and kimberlites. Rus. Geol. Geophys. 2009, 50, 999–1033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Hawkwsworth, C.J.; Lightfoot, P.C.; Hergt, J.M.; Naldrett, A.J.; Gorbachev, N.S.; Fedorenko, V.A.; Doherty, W. Remobilisation of the continental lithosphere by a mantle plume: Trace element, ans Sr-, Nd- and Pb isotope evidence from picritic and tholeiitic lavas of the Noril’sk district, Siberian trap. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1993, 114, 171–188. [Google Scholar]
  39. Krivolutskaya, N.A.; Ariskin, A.A.; Sluzhenikin, S.F.; Turovtsev, D.M. Geochemical thermometry of rocks of the Talnakh intrusion: Assessment of the melt composition and the crystallinity of the parental magma. Petrology 2001, 9, 389–414. [Google Scholar]
  40. Krivolutskaya, N.A. Formation of PGE-Cu-Ni deposits in the process of evolution of flood basalt magmatism in the Norilsk region. Geol. Ore Depos. 2011, 53, 303–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Malitch, K.N.; Badanina, I.Y.; Romanov, A.P.; Sluzhenikin, S.F. U-Pb age and Hf-Nd-Sr-Cu-S isotope systematics of the Binyuda and Dyumtaley ore-bearing intrusions (Taimyr, Russia). Lithosphera 2016, 16, 107–128. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  42. Malitch, K.N.; Belousova, E.A.; Griffin, W.L.; Badanina, I.Y.; Latypov, R.M.; Sluzhenikin, S.F. Chapter 7. New insights on the origin of ultramafic-mafic intrusions and associated Ni-Cu-PGE sulfide deposits of the Norilsk and Taimyr provinces, Russia: Evidence from radiogenic and stable isotope data. In Processes and Ore Deposits of Ultramafic-Mafic Magmas through Space and Time; Elsevier: Chennai, India, 2018; pp. 197–238. [Google Scholar]
  43. Petrov, O.V. (Ed.) Isotope Geochemistry of the Norilsk Deposits; VSEGEI: St.Peterbourg, Russia, 2017; p. 346. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  44. Krivolutskaya, N.; Gongalsky, B.; Kedrovskaya, T.; Kubrakova, I.; Tyutyunnik, O.; Chikatueva, V.; Bychkova, Y.; Kovalchuk, E.; Kononkova, N.; Yakushev, A. Geology of the Western Flanks of the Oktyabr’skoe Deposit, Norilsk District, Russia: Evidence of a Closed Magmatic System. Miner. Depos. 2019, 54, 611–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Romanov, A.P.; Kurbatov, I.I.; Malitch, K.N.; Snisar, S.G.; Borodina, E.V.; Erykalov, S.P. The Resource Potential of the Platinum Metals in Western Taimyr. Platin. Russ. 2011, 7, 135–160. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  46. Tomshin, M.D.; Kopylova, A.G.; Vasilyeva, A.E. Geochemical and isotope characteristics of intrusive traps in the Eastern Siberian Platform. In Geoconference on Science and Technologies in Geology, Exploration and Mining; Nauka: Novosibirsk, Russia, 2014; Volume 1, pp. 113–120. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  47. Krivolutskaya, N.; Krasilnikov, A.; Gongalsky, B.; Yakushev, A.; Svirskaya, N. Structure and Geochemical Features of the Volcanic Rocks in the Tunguska Syneclise (Siberian Trap Province). IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019, 362, 012090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Malitch, N.S.; Grinson, A.S.; Tuganova, E.V.; Chernyshev, N.M. Rifting of the Siberian platform. In Proceedings of the 28th Session of International Geological Congress, Tectonic Processes, Washington, DC, USA, 4–14 August 1984; Nedra: Moscow, Russia, 1988; pp. 184–193. [Google Scholar]
  49. Dolgal, A.S. Realization of V.N. Strakhov ideas in interpretation of geopotential fields. In Strakhov as Geophysics and Mathematic; Academician, V.N., Ed.; Nauka: Moscow, Russia, 2012; pp. 55–78. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  50. Krivolutskaya, N.; Latyshev, A.; Dolgal, A.; Gongalsky, B.; Makareva, E.; Makarev, A.; Svirskaya, N.; Bychkova, Y.; Yakushev, A.; Asavin, A. Unique PGE–Cu–Ni Norilsk Deposits, Siberian Trap Province: Magmatic and Tectonic Factors in Their Origin. Minerals 2019, 9, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Kamo, S.L.; Czamanske, G.K.; Amelin, Y. Rapid eruption of Siberian flood-volcanic rocks and evidence for coincidence with the Permian-Triassic boundary and mass extinction at 251 Ma. Earth Plan. Sci. Let. 2003, 214, 75–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Balk, P.I.; Dolgal, A.S.; Pugin, A.V.; Michurin, A.V.; Simanov, A.A.; Sharkhimullin, A.F. Effective algorithms for sourcewise approximation of geopotential fields. Izv. Phys. Solid Earth 2016, 52, 896–911. (In Russian) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Sherman, M.L. (Ed.) Geological Map 1:50000 Scale of the Central Part of the Norilsk District; Ministry of Geology: Moscow, Russia, 1981. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  54. Paderin, P.G. State Geological Map of Russian Federation, 1:1000000 Scale (New Version); R-(45)-47-Norilsk. Explanatory note 2000; VSEGEI: St Petersburg, Russia, 2000; p. 478. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  55. Lyul’ko, V.A. (Ed.) Legend for 1: 50 000 Scale Map, Norilsk Group; Geoinformmark: Moscow, Russia, 1993; p. 53. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  56. Karandashev, V.K.; Khvostikov, V.A.; Nosenko, S.V.; Burmii, Z. Stable highly enriched isotopes in routine analyses of rocks, soils, grounds, and sediments by ICP-MS. Inorg. Mater. 2017, 53, 1432–1441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Sereda, E.; Belyatsky, B.; Krivolutskaya, N. Geochemistry and Geochronology of Southern Norilsk Intrusions, SW Siberian Traps. Minerals 2020, 10, 165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Krivolutskaya, N. The problem of subdivision of volcanic rocks of trap formation of the Norilsk region. Doclady Earth Sci. 2011, 439, 1088–1092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Streckeisen, A.; Zanettin, B.; Le Bas, M.J.; Bonin, B.; Bateman, P.; Bellieni, G.; Dudek, A.; Efremova, S.; Keller, J.; Lameyre, J.; et al. Igneous Rocks. A Classification and Glossary of Therms; Le Maitre, R.W., Ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2002; p. 37. [Google Scholar]
  60. Hofmann, A.W. Chemical differentiation of the earth: The relationship between mantle, continental and ocean crust. Earth Planet Sci. Lett. 1988, 90, 297–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Krivolutskaya, N.; Sobolev, A.V.; Mikhailov, V.N.; Plechova, A.A.; Kostitsyn, Y.A.; Roschina, I.A.; Fekiacova, Z. Parental melt of the Nadezhdinsky Formation: Geochemistry, petrology and connection with Cu-Ni deposits (Norilsk area, Russia). Chem. Geol. 2012, 302–303, 87–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Datsenko, V.A.; Markov, F.B. (Eds.) Geological Map of the Norilsk Region and Adjacent Territories; R-45-XXIII, XXIV, Q-45; Nedra: Moscow, Russia, 1969; p. 81. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  63. Ryabov, V.V. Olivines and Their Petrological Significance; Nauka: Novosibirsk, Russia, 1992. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  64. Krivolutskaya, N.A.; Sobolev, A.V.; Snisar, S.G.; Gongalskiy, B.I.; Hauff, B.; Kuzmin, D.V.; Tushentsova, I.N.; Svirskaya, N.M.; Kononkova, N.N.; Schlychkova, T.B. Mineralogy, geochemistry and stratigraphy of the Maslovsky Pt–Cu–Ni sulfide deposit, Norilsk Region, Russia: Implications for relationship of ore-bearing intrusions and lavas. Miner. Depos. 2012, 47, 69–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Likhachev, A.P. Possibility of the self-enrichment by ore material and heavy sulfur isotope (34S) of mantle magmas forming Cu-Ni deposits and perspective places for ore discovering in the Norilsk area. Otechestvennaya Geol. 2019, 3, 1–18. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  66. Dneprovskaya, M.B.; Frenlel, M.Y.; Yaroshevsky, A.A. Quantitative ‘model of layering of the Talnakh intrusion. In Constrants of Models for Ore-Forming Systems; Nauka: Novosibirsk, Russia, 1987; pp. 96–106. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  67. Krivolutskaya, N.A.; Rudakova, A.V. Structure and geochemical characteristics of trap rocks from the Norilsk trough, northwestern Siberian Craton. Geochem. Int. 2009, 47, 675–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Fedorenko, V.A. Petrochemical series of the effusive rocks in the Norilsk area. Russ. Geol. Geophys. 1982, 6, 77–88. [Google Scholar]
  69. Sibik, S.; Edmonds, M.; Maclennan, J.; Svensen, H. Magmas erupted during the main puls of the Siberian trap volcanism were volatile-poor. J. Petrol. 2015, 56, 2089–2116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Krivolutskaya, N.A.; Sobolev, A.V. Magmatic inclusions in olivines from intrusions of the Noril’sk region, Northwestern Siberian Platform: Evidences for primary melts. Doclady Earth Sci. 2001, 381, 393–398. [Google Scholar]
  71. Sobolev, A.V.; Arndt, N.T.; Krivolutskaya, N.A.; Kuzmin, D.V.; Sobolev, S.V. The origin of gases that caused the Permian-Triassic extinction. In Volcanism and Global Environmental Change; Schmidt, A., Fristad, K., Elkins-Tanton, L., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2015; pp. 147–163. [Google Scholar]
  72. Rad’ko, V.A. Facies of Intrusive and Effusive Magmatism in the Norilsk Area; VSEGEI: St Petersburg, Russia, 2016; p. 225. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Map of the Siberian flood basalt province with the position of the Kulyumber area (dark rectangle). The shaded area is the Norilsk–Igarka paleorift zone, the star shows position of the volcanic Section 2 in the Lake Lama area. Black dot is Norilsk city.
Figure 1. Map of the Siberian flood basalt province with the position of the Kulyumber area (dark rectangle). The shaded area is the Norilsk–Igarka paleorift zone, the star shows position of the volcanic Section 2 in the Lake Lama area. Black dot is Norilsk city.
Minerals 10 00409 g001
Figure 2. Complex map of magnetic and gravitational fields at the NW Siberian platform (made by the authors based on 1:200000 gravities and 1:100000 aeromagnetic mapping at 700- and 2400-m barometric altitudes).
Figure 2. Complex map of magnetic and gravitational fields at the NW Siberian platform (made by the authors based on 1:200000 gravities and 1:100000 aeromagnetic mapping at 700- and 2400-m barometric altitudes).
Minerals 10 00409 g002
Figure 3. Geological map of the Kulyumber river valley (after Ltd. Norilskgeology data with the authors’ corrections). Position of the studied area is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 3. Geological map of the Kulyumber river valley (after Ltd. Norilskgeology data with the authors’ corrections). Position of the studied area is shown in Figure 1.
Minerals 10 00409 g003
Figure 4. Geological map of the Khalil site (after Ltd. Norilskgeology data with the authors’ corrections). Line 1-1 demonstrates the position of the cross-section; X-8, X-18: positions of samples; studied intrusions, complexes 1: Ergalakhsky; 2: Kureysky (Khalil intrusion); 3: Norilsk; 4: Katangsky; black star: Paleo volcano.
Figure 4. Geological map of the Khalil site (after Ltd. Norilskgeology data with the authors’ corrections). Line 1-1 demonstrates the position of the cross-section; X-8, X-18: positions of samples; studied intrusions, complexes 1: Ergalakhsky; 2: Kureysky (Khalil intrusion); 3: Norilsk; 4: Katangsky; black star: Paleo volcano.
Minerals 10 00409 g004
Figure 5. Geological map of the Kaya site (after Ltd. Norilskgeology data with the authors’ corrections).
Figure 5. Geological map of the Kaya site (after Ltd. Norilskgeology data with the authors’ corrections).
Minerals 10 00409 g005
Figure 6. Sections of volcanic rocks in the Khalil area (a), Section 1 and the eastern Norilsk area (b), Section 2 shown in Figure 1 and in [58].
Figure 6. Sections of volcanic rocks in the Khalil area (a), Section 1 and the eastern Norilsk area (b), Section 2 shown in Figure 1 and in [58].
Minerals 10 00409 g006
Figure 7. Photomicrographs of the volcanic rocks in the Khalil area. (a,b) Syverminsky formation; (a) tholeiitic basalt (sample X-24), (b) amygdaloidal basalt (sample X-26); (c,d) Syverminsky formation, tuffs (sample X-39); (e,f) Gudchikhinsky formation, olivine-bearing basalts (sample X-27) (e) sheaf-shaped texture, (f) ophitic texture. Minerals: Ol: olivine, Cpx: clinopyroxene, Pl: plagioclase, Cl: chlorite, Amf: amphibole, Pr: prehnite, Mag: magnetite; Gl: glass. Scale bars, µm: a–d—500, e,f—200.
Figure 7. Photomicrographs of the volcanic rocks in the Khalil area. (a,b) Syverminsky formation; (a) tholeiitic basalt (sample X-24), (b) amygdaloidal basalt (sample X-26); (c,d) Syverminsky formation, tuffs (sample X-39); (e,f) Gudchikhinsky formation, olivine-bearing basalts (sample X-27) (e) sheaf-shaped texture, (f) ophitic texture. Minerals: Ol: olivine, Cpx: clinopyroxene, Pl: plagioclase, Cl: chlorite, Amf: amphibole, Pr: prehnite, Mag: magnetite; Gl: glass. Scale bars, µm: a–d—500, e,f—200.
Minerals 10 00409 g007
Figure 8. BSE images of volcanic rocks from the Khalil site (ae) Syverminsky formation: a–c: basalt, sample X-20: (a) tholeiitic texture, (b) devitrified glass under high magnification, details of Figure 8a, (c) titanite grain, detail of Figure 8a; (d) basalt, sample X-10; (e) tuff, sample X-37; (f,g) Gudchikhinsky formation; (h) Khakanchansky formation, tuff, sample X-0; No point corresponds to the number in Table 1; Minerals: Pl: plagioclase, Px: pyroxene, Ilm: ilmenite; Gl: glass, Am: amphibole; Kps: potassium feldspar). Scale bars, µm: a, c, d, f—100; b, e, g, h—10.
Figure 8. BSE images of volcanic rocks from the Khalil site (ae) Syverminsky formation: a–c: basalt, sample X-20: (a) tholeiitic texture, (b) devitrified glass under high magnification, details of Figure 8a, (c) titanite grain, detail of Figure 8a; (d) basalt, sample X-10; (e) tuff, sample X-37; (f,g) Gudchikhinsky formation; (h) Khakanchansky formation, tuff, sample X-0; No point corresponds to the number in Table 1; Minerals: Pl: plagioclase, Px: pyroxene, Ilm: ilmenite; Gl: glass, Am: amphibole; Kps: potassium feldspar). Scale bars, µm: a, c, d, f—100; b, e, g, h—10.
Minerals 10 00409 g008
Figure 9. Diagram SiO2–Na2O+K2O [59] for volcanic rocks of the NW Siberian Traps province.
Figure 9. Diagram SiO2–Na2O+K2O [59] for volcanic rocks of the NW Siberian Traps province.
Minerals 10 00409 g009
Figure 10. Diagrams MgO vs. SiO2 (a), Al2O3 (b), Fe2O3 (c), TiO2 (d), CaO (e), P2O5 (f), Na2O (g), and K2O (h).
Figure 10. Diagrams MgO vs. SiO2 (a), Al2O3 (b), Fe2O3 (c), TiO2 (d), CaO (e), P2O5 (f), Na2O (g), and K2O (h).
Minerals 10 00409 g010
Figure 11. Spider-diagrams for basalts of the Syverminsky formation (a), Gudchikhinsky formation (b) and tuffs (c), the Khalil site, Norilsk area. Samples OV-36/622 and 76/2a—from the Norilsk area. Here and in Figures 15 and 16 elements are normalized to primitive mantle after [60].
Figure 11. Spider-diagrams for basalts of the Syverminsky formation (a), Gudchikhinsky formation (b) and tuffs (c), the Khalil site, Norilsk area. Samples OV-36/622 and 76/2a—from the Norilsk area. Here and in Figures 15 and 16 elements are normalized to primitive mantle after [60].
Minerals 10 00409 g011
Figure 12. Initial εSr–εNd (a) and 206Pb/204Pb–207Pb/204Pb (b) for the volcanic rocks. Formations: Sv—Syverminsky, Gd—Gudchikhinsky, Tk—Tuklonsky.
Figure 12. Initial εSr–εNd (a) and 206Pb/204Pb–207Pb/204Pb (b) for the volcanic rocks. Formations: Sv—Syverminsky, Gd—Gudchikhinsky, Tk—Tuklonsky.
Minerals 10 00409 g012
Figure 13. BSE images of the gabbro-dolerites from the Ergalakhsky complex (a) Norilsk-type intrusion, (bd) sample X-32; Kureysky complex, Khalil intrusion, (eh) sample X-19, (e) poikilophytic structure, (f,g) poikilophytic + doleritic structure, (h) titanomagnetite crystals in gabbro-dolerite, (i,j) sample X-35; Katangsky complex, (k,l) sample X-10. Minerals are Cpx: clinopyroxene, Pl: plagioclase, Ol: olivine, Srp: serpentine, Ap: apatite. Point numbers correspond to those in Table 4.
Figure 13. BSE images of the gabbro-dolerites from the Ergalakhsky complex (a) Norilsk-type intrusion, (bd) sample X-32; Kureysky complex, Khalil intrusion, (eh) sample X-19, (e) poikilophytic structure, (f,g) poikilophytic + doleritic structure, (h) titanomagnetite crystals in gabbro-dolerite, (i,j) sample X-35; Katangsky complex, (k,l) sample X-10. Minerals are Cpx: clinopyroxene, Pl: plagioclase, Ol: olivine, Srp: serpentine, Ap: apatite. Point numbers correspond to those in Table 4.
Minerals 10 00409 g013aMinerals 10 00409 g013b
Figure 14. MgO (wt.%) vs. Al2O3 (a), SiO2 (b), CaO (c), Fe2O3 (d), Na2O (e), K2O (f), P2O5 (g), TiO2 (h) for intrusive rocks.
Figure 14. MgO (wt.%) vs. Al2O3 (a), SiO2 (b), CaO (c), Fe2O3 (d), Na2O (e), K2O (f), P2O5 (g), TiO2 (h) for intrusive rocks.
Minerals 10 00409 g014
Figure 15. Spider-diagrams for intrusive rocks of the (a) Ergalakhsky complex, (b) Kureysky complex, Khalil intrusion, (c) Norilsk type Intrusion 3, (d) Katangsky complex, (e) Dzhaltulsky massif and (f) Norilsk 1 intrusion.
Figure 15. Spider-diagrams for intrusive rocks of the (a) Ergalakhsky complex, (b) Kureysky complex, Khalil intrusion, (c) Norilsk type Intrusion 3, (d) Katangsky complex, (e) Dzhaltulsky massif and (f) Norilsk 1 intrusion.
Minerals 10 00409 g015
Figure 16. Diagrams (La/Sm)n–(Gd/Yb)n (a) and (La/Yb)n–U/Nb)n (b) for intrusive rocks.
Figure 16. Diagrams (La/Sm)n–(Gd/Yb)n (a) and (La/Yb)n–U/Nb)n (b) for intrusive rocks.
Minerals 10 00409 g016
Figure 17. Diagrams Cr-V (a) and Cu-Ni (b) for intrusive rocks.
Figure 17. Diagrams Cr-V (a) and Cu-Ni (b) for intrusive rocks.
Minerals 10 00409 g017
Table 1. Chemical composition of rock-forming minerals from volcanic rocks of the Khalil site, wt.%.
Table 1. Chemical composition of rock-forming minerals from volcanic rocks of the Khalil site, wt.%.
No.SampleSiO2TiO2Al2O3 FeOMnOMgOCaONa2OK2OTotalMineral
1X-2053.98bdl27.770.89bdl0.2411.704.620.3199.51Pl
2X-2055.62bdl26.840.95bdl0.1010.575.320.4199.80Pl
3X-2050.83bdl29.590.61bdl0.3614.343.310.1299.17Pl
4X-2051.740.403.636.630.1416.1620.210.23bdl99.36Cpx
5X-2051.430.521.6212.680.3114.4818.040.22bdl99.35Cpx
6X-2049.300.206.0418.150.3214.258.980.380.0997.71Glass
7X-2030.7737.382.010.870.020.0728.950.030.00100.10Titanite
8X-2648.090.674.6218.120.2013.9610.871.200.2198.20Am
9X-2649.471.084.5516.330.2412.2512.040.820.1897.01Am
10X-2663.140.0419.810.280.010.060.660.6413.8798.51Kps
11X-2658.310.0725.610.780.020.078.066.230.5299.66Pl
12X-2667.580.0220.820.310.010.010.849.810.1099.50Pl
13X-2657.060.1527.170.940.020.237.334.821.8799.59Pl
14X-2667.570.0420.620.220.020.001.009.970.1599.57Pl
15X-2654.06bdl27.481.07bdl0.3611.414.780.2799.42Pl
16X-100.3045.750.1048.453.350.050.050.010.0198.06Ilm
17X-1061.880.0025.550.300.040.062.315.523.6599.30Pl
18X-1048.260.0426.792.310.080.4313.691.513.6696.76Pl
19X-1052.320.0828.730.470.000.1612.843.790.3398.71Pl
20X-1050.710.393.4117.140.2512.1412.370.340.1797.69Px
21X-1039.050.7911.5222.210.1814.540.710.034.8393.86Am
22X-1054.070.0528.160.560.030.1511.874.180.3699.42Am
23X-1051.930.322.7520.290.4210.6912.770.340.1299.61Cpx
24X-3762.462.1818.620.200.000.032.578.630.3295.01Glass
25X-3729.330.0218.7325.080.3316.700.150.020.0390.48Glass
26X-3728.190.0117.6625.410.3216.250.110.010.0288.10Glass
27X-374.420.000.6074.690.000.270.570.040.3981.04Mag
28X-3764.010.0319.540.100.000.010.030.3415.2299.28Kps
29Х-2750.301.082.0010.090.2414.9919.410.310.0098.41Cpx
30Х-2750.391.131.9310.590.2914.9619.140.350.0198.79Cpx
31Х-2751.330.691.977.700.2015.9421.490.250.0299.58Cpx
32Х-2751.580.981.999.200.2115.2719.760.270.0099.25Cpx
33Х-2750.820.152.8123.400.6515.632.930.540.1297.04Opx
34Х-2751.220.0830.360.700.020.1013.672.900.9299.96Pl
35Х-2753.960.1429.430.720.000.0910.344.990.42100.07Pl
36Х-270.2947.420.0548.121.930.060.080.000.0197.95Ilm
37Х-274.420.000.6074.690.000.270.570.040.3980.98Mag
38Х-2749.140.0827.020.780.000.0611.374.250.3793.06Glass
39Х-2764.010.0318.540.100.000.010.030.3415.2298.28Kps
40Х-2738.36bdlbdl21.570.2840.210.23bdlbdl100.65Ol
41Х-2738.25bdlbdl22.440.2738.840.24bdlbdl100.02Ol
42Х-065.950.0018.340.000.010.010.120.7414.5599.73Kps
Note: Analysis Nos 4, 5, 8, 32 containing Cr2O3 0.15, 0.21, 0.25, 0.77 consequently; analyses No 7—0.15 Cl; analysis Nos 40, 41—0.31 and 0.33 Ni. Formations, No: 1–28—Syverminsky, 29–40—Gudchikhinsky, 41—Khakanchansky. Minerals: Ol—olivine, Kps—potassium feldspar, Mag—magnetite, Opx—orthopyroxene, Cpx—clinopyroxene, Ilm—ilmenite, Pl—plagioclase, Am—amphibole; bdl—below detection limit.
Table 2. Composition of the volcanic rocks from the Khalil and Kaya sites and Norilsk area.
Table 2. Composition of the volcanic rocks from the Khalil and Kaya sites and Norilsk area.
No12345678
Sample, NoX-3-2X-3-3X-10X-20Х-21/3X-22X-24X-26
SiO251.2653.8451.3449.7453.2352.3147.4648.64
TiO21.551.741.671.521.551.631.791.23
Al2O315.0315.2214.6314.7414.2214.4714.0914.94
Fe2O310.899.8611.4510.949.6810.3814.4411.23
MnO0.220.070.230.200.120.210.170.14
MgO3.953.435.476.305.885.164.946.89
CaO5.463.237.214.934.707.329.467.48
Na2O6.467.163.793.036.103.783.943.50
K2O0.070.091.663.280.121.811.171.78
P2O50.230.220.230.210.210.230.290.13
LOI 4.654.982.234.743.922.413.633.89
Li22.7717.5122.71n/a29.9135.786.5434.44
Rb12010367.0n/a2.5974.211745.5
Sr508712652n/a2536597541395
Y27.032.129.5n/a32.627.828.418.1
Cs0.640.092.02n/a0.060.960.290.45
Ba234312404n/a14827759422
La24.029.622.3n/a67.821.219.721.1
Ce37.468.247.4n/a99.346.546.037.1
Pr4.819.825.62n/a8.805.105.904.47
Nd21.139.721.9n/a33.521.520.315.2
Sm4.947.855.68n/a6.655.065.543.68
Eu1.302.271.66n/a1.361.321.291.54
Gd4.716.594.64n/a6.094.974.763.41
Tb0.770.990.85n/a0.920.840.800.55
Dy4.675.935.30n/a5.515.154.973.50
Ho0.901.131.04n/a1.050.981.030.68
Er2.623.132.88n/a3.042.912.901.74
Tm0.370.420.40n/a0.420.390.370.24
Yb2.542.922.41n/a2.652.642.641.59
Lu0.350.400.37n/a0.380.390.360.23
Pb3.2918.245.52n/a0.301.284.714.20
Th4.735.224.80n/a4.485.095.252.80
U1.321.871.25n/a1.231.461.380.71
Sc21.621.629.9n/a21.224.128.728.6
Ti92921043111912n/a9292n/a112648358
V168149187n/a159171176207
Cr183188219n/a204206219305
Co25.37.633.9n/a24.926.318.453.9
Ni30.019.056.5n/a54.356.856.9105.6
Cu28.326.5125n/a17.49.2117.5113
Zn13753.2150n/a38.038.030.654.8
Ga20.023.1n/an/a18.518.4n/an/a
Zr212231251n/a209208255158
Nb16.118.217.6n/a15.819.218.68.8
Hf4.615.155.84n/a4.415.465.963.55
Ta1.011.101.26n/a1.031.161.310.53
No91011121314151617
Sample, NoX-27Х-283.20/13.21/13.23/1Х-37X-042704270/4
SiO249.0951.2252.6950.1547.4550.9354.9345.1452.54
TiO21.201.561.561.401.351.031.143.912.44
Al2O315.5014.6714.2213.9615.5513.4314.6413.4613.99
Fe2O310.5711.569.7913.6011.6310.239.8313.2311.62
MnO0.180.120.230.170.240.130.130.210.19
MgO7.965.725.626.105.805.895.563.583.37
CaO8.884.126.375.5511.435.912.8410.547.50
Na2O2.803.553.182.372.682.772.712.353.12
K2O1.332.831.550.400.161.402.271.951.85
P2O50.130.210.220.190.140.150.180.120.71
LOI2.124.084.295.833.437.725.613.872.32
Li19.7734.1313.5417.2021.2541.8936.6020.318.61
Be0.571.800.550.340.081.37n/a2.482.25
Rb291018.123.333936583119
Sr490439401380346168173503409
Y15.126.620.226.126.021.024.946.935.9
Cs1.140.25n/an/an/a0.280.320.781.90
Ba323337230292585315989986848
La12.220.721.222.335.220.426.543.226.9
Ce26.746.542.248.968.444.656.2101.669.1
Pr3.35.424.596.037.535.056.7613.029.29
Nd14.823.917.325.228.921.222.252.640.0
Sm3.495.644.196.136.384.415.2710.518.81
Eu1.251.361.581.821.711.251.392.802.66
Gd3.355.273.915.715.933.944.239.598.17
Tb0.520.800.640.900.880.590.801.501.34
Dy2.944.793.895.055.023.554.528.827.93
Ho0.570.900.771.000.990.660.901.801.60
Er1.432.652.032.692.651.882.444.764.30
Tm0.220.350.290.370.380.260.380.700.64
Yb1.382.331.762.402.541.722.304.233.84
Lu0.200.340.250.350.360.250.350.630.56
Pb2.150.404.182.073.871.4110.108.9811.20
Th0.794.115.222.904.123.505.533.421.43
U0.21.011.410.761.070.911.352.071.37
Sc2622.112.124.021.721.832.418.914.2
Ti71949352590410316880961758041223086840
V194175123190161184175175125
Cr312228173615821227222649160
Co43.326.414.330.339.736.431.134.227.4
Ni12960.685.348.080.277.460.925.924.9
Cu59.426.598.631.155.566.577.843.422.7
Zn5631.1bdlbdl118.139.8355183140
Ga17.120.1n/an/an/a18.70n/a23.7924.15
Zr89.119119818790133201399401
Nb8.1916.715.112.414.310.113.840.311.5
Hf1.944.073.184.514.842.965.228.459.14
Ta0.381.020.820.900.960.610.832.510.59
No181920212223242526
Sample,No4270/54270/64270/84270/94270/12OV-36/62275/276/2a76/1
SiO252.7652.9953.0251.8452.6046.3146.7546.2348.08
TiO21.641.781.851.681.951.141.661.020.85
Al2O315.4814.7214.4415.0414.468.4111.6115.5813.51
Fe2O38.839.379.489.209.8213.1912.708.739.08
MnO0.130.150.150.140.150.180.160.170.14
MgO6.115.075.105.875.9819.2110.407.189.34
CaO7.978.898.958.927.809.509.738.2410.00
Na2O2.102.572.542.462.431.001.910.762.56
K2O0.470.881.170.970.650.140.451.480.45
P2O50.220.250.260.230.280.140.130.120.09
LOI 3.912.882.983.153.42n/a4.1110.284.90
Li25.357.366.949.1420.57n/an/an/an/a
Be1.721.631.741.611.31n/an/an/an/a
Rb19414141246.947.01439
Sr510374367407548179.34147275210
Y30.232.332.231.630.415.4414.420.720.3
Cs0.201.821.922.410.27n/an/an/an/a
Ba33136937734337052.4537.4291166
La24.724.925.424.423.87.556.4111.614.2
Ce52.456.155.953.150.517.715.624.629.0
Pr6.476.997.016.566.322.462.193.253.54
Nd26.228.828.627.226.811.610.715.015.0
Sm5.626.186.245.966.023.052.783.603.41
Eu1.641.851.821.841.941.010.941.240.94
Gd5.485.996.085.885.963.523.153.843.60
Tb0.870.990.970.920.910.510.480.600.58
Dy5.155.725.685.455.373.163.053.973.87
Ho1.041.091.141.101.080.610.570.800.78
Er2.753.023.022.952.801.621.462.252.24
Tm0.400.500.440.430.400.210.210.330.33
Yb2.432.772.722.582.411.381.312.182.17
Lu0.350.380.380.370.350.190.190.320.32
Pb7.367.327.306.346.302.902.314.625.34
Th4.304.454.484.372.631.240.942.163.12
U1.271.141.161.120.670.370.310.610.79
Sc22.725.025.724.627.6226n/a36.533.3
Ti9427105121050910210116356936976277004892
V174179189186217n/an/an/an/a
Cr32232532239520891n/an/an/a
Co37.435.635.839.437.81127241.451.0
Ni11380.570.513561.01331324117.5346.4
Cu65.139.838.532.734.313211898.870.1
Zn92.597.097.796.110379.9n/a86.087.7
Ga20.0820.4220.4020.7819.525.26n/an/an/a
Zr20622022121520679.98191.487.5
Nb29.618.018.016.016.65.255.716.35.7
Hf4.995.415.355.204.902.182.222.402.38
Ta1.011.061.061.020.850.350.380.420.39
Note: Oxides are given in wt.%, elements—in ppm. Samples, No: 1–10, 14, 15—Khalil site; 11–13—Kaya site; 16–26—Norilsk area (Section 2); Samples, No, Formations: 1–8, 10–14, 17–22—Syverminsky; 16, 17—Ivakinsky; 10, 23, 24—Gudchikhinsky; 15, 25, 26—Khakanchansky; bdl—below detection limit, n/a—element was not analyzed.
Table 3. Isotope composition of the the volcanic rocks.
Table 3. Isotope composition of the the volcanic rocks.
12345678
Sample, NoX-3-3X-3-2X-15-2X-2876/2a 76/б 76/1 75/2
Rockbasaltbasaltbasaltbasalttuffbasalttuffpicrite
Weight, g0.106720.112900.133600.109870.114500.188420.239900.13344
Rb, ppm2.542.5915.688.639.894.77.849.57
Sr, ppm329711666399242395195245
87Rb/86Sr0.022270.010530.067960.642440.475120.693300.116360.11312
87Sr/86Sr0.7074450.7079490.7084790.7098110.7090100.7088550.7077440.705839
±2σ0.0000050.0000060.0000060.0000040.0000040.0000060.0000050.000004
Sri0.7073660.7079120.7082370.7075260.7073130.7063800.7073290.705435
ε Sr44.8252.5757.1947.1044.0930.8344.3117.42
Sm, ppm7, 405, 656, 485, 603, 1383, 903, 133, 938
Nd, ppm35, 326, 030, 323, 513, 0719, 3113, 3914, 34
147Sm/144Nd0.126770.131290.129150.143790.145110.122030.141320.16597
143Nd/144Nd0.5123620.5123730.5123880.5123970.5124260.5123560.5123180.512785
±2σ0.0000030.0000030.0000060.0000020.0000040.0000020.0000020.000005
Ndi0.5121540.5121570.5121760.5121610.5121880.5121560.5120860512512
εNd−3.14−3.07−2.70−3.01−2.47−3.10−4.473.85
206Pb/204Pb19.032619.462523.536027.300018.487918.542218.229318.4164
±2σ0.00050.00080.00090.00290.00160.00070.00040.0006
207Pb/204Pb15.616515.650115.828315.706215.569715.591615.542115.5794
±2σ0.00050.00070.00070.00170.00130.00080.00040.0007
208Pb/204Pb38.740939.320540.761548.421538.472338.521038.250938.6319
±2σ0.00160.00220.00180.00520.00320.00290.00120.0025
206Pb/204Pb *18.771318.422718.832619.202118.154818.208517.726318.0827
207Pb/204Pb *15.603115.596915.587315.291415.552615.574515.516315.5623
208Pb/204Pb *38.503438.112837.994237.719138.088738.136737.715038.2471
Note. Numbers, formations: 1–4—Syverminsky, 5, 7—Khakanchansky, 6—Tuklonsky, 8—Gudchikhinsky. *—calculated at 250 Ma.
Table 4. Composition of rock-forming minerals from intrusive rocks of the Khalil site, wt.%.
Table 4. Composition of rock-forming minerals from intrusive rocks of the Khalil site, wt.%.
NoSample, NoSiO2TiO2Al2O3FeOMnOMgOCaONa2OK2OCr2O3TotalMineral
1X-4836.570.020.0237.080.5727.140.330.05bdlbdl101.80Ol
2X-4836.300.040.0138.190.6826.220.340.00bdl0.01101.82Ol
3X-4835.650.070.0136.040.5428.470.300.01bdl0.01101.12Ol
4X-4835.67bdl0.0236.050.5328.480.320.02bdl0.03101.15Ol
5X-4836.750.020.0334.510.5229.260.280.01 bdl0.01101.45Ol
6X-4836.610.030.0336.600.5727.480.320.03bdlbdl101.67Ol
7X-4852.590.871.5511.790.2914.4718.750.26bdl0.14100.71Cpx
8X-4851.960.951.6512.610.3313.9918.050.220.030.0799.87Cpx
9X-4850.941.342.3512.840.3113.6318.530.310.000.13100.39Cpx
10X-4856.370.1227.060.740.020.109.915.010.70bdl100.03Pl
11X-4857.780.1426.060.71bdl0.078.795.401.00bdl99.94Pl
12X-4856.110.1227.070.52bdl0.1210.215.030.66bdl99.84Pl
13X-4855.490.1127.560.660.010.1110.484.850.60bdl99.87Pl
14X-4852.320.911.4812.070.2614.4518.980.25bdl0.08100.84Cpx
15X-4851.561.352.3212.470.3213.8218.860.270.010.13101.10Cpx
16X-3252.161.001.7114.320.3115.5615.560.230.000.02100.87Cpx
17X-3249.25bdl0.1525.030.2112.131.510.010.120.0788.50Cpx
18X-3246.97bdl0.7827.180.3510.891.340.030.130.0487.77Sp
19X-3244.09bdl0.3031.560.478.391.800.020.090.0786.82Sp
20X-3249.27bdl0.1326.020.3011.821.810.020.130.0989.66Sp
21X-3244.43bdl0.4332.600.548.461.760.020.070.0788.40Sp
22X-3244.51bdl2.3529.870.459.521.810.000.090.0788.69Sp
23X-3252.020.723.428.250.1715.5319.650.23bdl0.31100.31Cpx
24X-3248.750.0527.663.970.091.2613.172.350.11bdl97.41Pl
25X-3250.610.0330.800.970.010.1014.603.000.150.02100.28Pl
26X-3252.020.0529.850.830.040.1213.683.320.160.06100.12Pl
27X-3250.810.0130.480.800.030.1214.282.710.150.0399.41Pl
28X-3249.280.0132.290.820.030.0815.932.230.09bdl100.75Pl
29X-3255.810.1127.270.880.000.0710.524.960.310.0299.96Pl
30X-350.2641.900.1351.613.860.090.010.06bdl0.0497.95Ilm
31X-350.389.074.0477.601.532.550.020.00bdl0.0295.26Mag
32X-3553.190.0929.221.170.020.0812.374.070.260.01100.50Pl
33X-3550.940.683.698.070.1814.7921.280.31bdl0.09100.04Cpx
34X-3551.710.573.057.440.2015.4721.260.28bdl0.10100.12Cpx
35X-3553.720.551.617.830.5015.4520.080.550.04 bdl100.33Cpx
36X-3551.180.883.779.610.2114.3821.020.38bdl0.01101.46Cpx
37X-3551.570.0330.351.030.020.0813.933.320.170.01100.50Pl
38X-3554.890.0527.950.88bdl0.0911.094.780.32bdl100.05Pl
39X-3559.180.0423.671.900.031.075.756.620.31bdl98.57Pl
40X-3553.190.1129.351.570.040.0412.753.960.20bdl101.22Pl
41X-751.420.612.977.500.1815.0121.350.30bdl0.1599.47Cpx
42X-753.060.030.316.360.3215.5623.550.15bdl0.0399.37Cpx
43X-749.221.133.6610.160.2814.2720.010.40bdlbdl99.12Cpx
44X-750.090.852.779.850.2914.7919.970.390.010.0198.99Cpx
45X-750.770.503.117.090.1815.7921.450.28bdl0.3599.53Cpx
46X-754.940.0928.010.860.010.0810.524.880.35bdl99.74Pl
47X-1054.770.0827.730.92bdl0.1210.764.630.33bdl99.33Pl
48X-1054.410.1027.380.92bdl0.1211.674.300.260.0299.19Pl
49X-1042.590.2012.7111.380.1314.2911.203.280.500.0296.29Am
50X-1967.91bdl20.540.26bdl0.011.089.980.03bdl99.82Pl
51X-1952.500.482.639.070.3618.1811.891.050.28bdl96.44Am
52X-1929.4134.510.772.080.070.0227.020.00bdl0.0193.90Titanite
53X-1949.021.164.410.010.2213.9820.330.41bdlbdl99.53Cpx
54X-1951.050.662.769.860.2515.0519.770.33bdlbdl99.73Cpx
55X-1948.91.134.4410.310.2613.8520.140.41bdlbdl99.44Cpx
56X-1950.90.712.739.870.2915.0519.420.38bdlbdl99.35Cpx
57X-3950.270.883.528.620.1814.7220.810.20bdl0.1599.36Cpx
58X-3950.930.833.698.280.1615.3519.560.22bdl0.3599.36Cpx
59X-3950.840.563.298.940.2016.0419.070.21bdl0.2399.39Cpx
60X-3950.700.843.1711.560.2514.0918.840.24bdl0.0699.75Cpx
61X-3950.060.943.4311.830.2514.9817.570.250.010.0999.40Cpx
62X-3949.510.0431.360.54bdl0.2615.332.610.09bdl99.75Pl
63X-3952.270.0329.660.99bdl0.4112.243.840.17bdl99.61Pl
64X-3949.48bdl30.171.260.020.8514.572.550.11bdl99.00Pl
65X-3950.710.0430.340.70 bdl0.2914.892.790.100.0199.86Pl
66X-3950.610.0331.340.670.010.2414.002.980.12bdl99.99Pl
67X-3949.340.094.9717.840.4712.2610.850.960.050.0196.84Am
Note: Minerals names are in Table 1. bdl—below detection limit.
Table 5. Composition of intrusive rocks.
Table 5. Composition of intrusive rocks.
No12345678910
Sample, NoX-6X-6/1X-6-5X-7X-8X-8-3Х-18-1X-19X-25Х-35
SiO246.9646.8148.7646.9347.7547.9347.7647.4646.3347.27
TiO21.311.321.511.561.351.381.661.791.581.6
Al2O314.6514.4414.6812.8314.6914.7214.314.0913.3913.83
Fe2O312.1712.3613.1514.0711.9912.8713.6414.4414.4314.4
MnO0.1570.1680.1960.2150.1990.1740.210.1650.2240.208
MgO6.997.066.997.257.167.376.944.946.816.48
CaO10.5210.6210.4410.938.7510.5810.039.4610.7110.79
Na2O4.133.72.593.154.433.092.843.942.872.78
K2O0.080.060.520.890.510.250.411.170.930.87
P2O50.140.130.170.220.140.140.220.290.210.2
LOI 2.773.070.781.862.91.381.862.112.241.35
Rb1.440.7613.519.515.96.79.422.125.521.2
Sr197193192548867203255591687412
Y25.125.230.130.625.126.432.339.229.632.9
Ba67621621999685157227219211
La6.486.918.9711.486.736.3411.1314.089.1911.67
Ce15.716.421.925.216.215.726.431.923.527.2
Pr2.182.312.923.362.342.303.474.283.013.43
Nd10.110.814.014.210.59.6916.619.214.316.2
Sm3.103.243.893.882.992.984.385.414.024.35
Eu1.051.131.301.381.001.061.391.701.251.38
Gd3.713.974.594.773.833.855.475.834.874.88
Tb0.680.710.760.760.650.660.880.990.820.83
Dy4.194.605.025.083.984.555.936.565.305.30
Ho0.930.961.031.151.010.931.201.371.101.07
Er2.622.752.982.832.522.633.674.023.343.31
Tm0.370.380.410.460.360.400.500.600.450.47
Yb2.462.702.913.082.632.563.343.873.013.14
Lu0.370.390.420.460.390.360.510.590.450.46
Pb0.990.713.041.051.031.512.221.580.991.54
Th0.970.891.221.690.971.071.842.361.431.68
U0.290.330.400.850.380.340.851.190.780.87
Sc31.138.939.532.629.832.337.828.339.335.6
V281266299304294299322325340336
Cr25723319721024526016529197163
Co42.851.947.548.836.844.145.748.850.146.3
Ni1101191081031061121015011293.4
Cu42.920.815712343.392.814613382.1132
Zn63.674.1116.371.763.071.4115.054.087.194.6
Zr78.887.510610895.785.5131181108130
Nb3.763.965.926.674.304.336.888.836.356.61
Hf2.562.402.602.922.742.323.454.642.833.05
Ta0.240.260.340.420.270.270.420.610.380.42
No1112131415161718192021
Sample, NoХ-29Х-31Х-32Х-33Х-34Х-43X-44X-46X-48X-40DM-27/20
SiO248.1748.0648.1447.9447.8947.6547.1250.6851.0651.4647.20
TiO20.960.9611.030.990.920.952.462.422.410.94
Al2O315.1915.0714.7114.814.8715.0214.5813.5113.8813.5516.46
Fe2O310.6410.9511.2511.511.1410.8911.1712.3813.6813.6211.02
MnO0.1570.1660.1720.160.1680.1470.1780.1610.1350.1860.15
MgO7.978.48.557.928.358.98.33.243.13.126.11
CaO11.7211.7311.7811.3511.6610.5411.867.926.736.9411.21
Na2O2.062.072.052.171.962.071.763.223.23.063.41
K2O0.370.230.210.220.150.330.222.152.052.370.62
P2O50.080.090.080.090.080.080.080.770.780.760.15
LOI 2.552.131.862.662.593.253.573.162.822.122.29
Rb13.76.19.08.05.18.76.649.749.056.619.8
Sr261226233236235205212383404437369
Y17.317.518.920.918.318.219.250.550.749.720.8
Ba13190821057310990869756833143
La4.614.865.986.125.305.036.2851.6945.4244.666.32
Ce11.011.312.614.212.512.114.7111.898.396.115.1
Pr1.431.561.651.871.671.601.9213.5712.2411.982.00
Nd6.737.028.098.998.347.888.7255.047.246.49.8
Sm2.092.312.382.552.372.292.5712.0011.1611.472.68
Eu0.760.850.870.960.910.840.983.513.123.100.99
Gd2.482.702.733.032.862.793.0311.109.319.093.43
Tb0.450.400.480.500.470.450.531.731.541.490.58
Dy2.983.033.033.413.012.913.369.568.848.743.82
Ho0.630.600.610.670.600.580.691.871.771.730.80
Er1.831.931.822.001.801.752.095.304.674.702.15
Tm0.260.280.260.280.250.250.270.700.640.670.32
Yb1.541.561.741.841.641.701.904.504.114.072.18
Lu0.260.260.240.280.240.250.270.670.580.640.33
Pb1.422.813.022.160.973.261.1610.559.0710.671.10
Th0.740.760.650.790.610.800.854.855.435.101.06
U0.170.170.150.190.140.200.231.391.381.300.42
Sc30.829.138.737.538.936.539.723.827.127.440.7
V270271270295291267263142141138261
Cr397418406329336398367353732282
Co42.547.148.249.248.145.354.226.622.624.843.6
Ni10611212111212212112514.815.418.293.6
Cu1001031171361409311321.464.834.190.9
Zn69.664.388.492.696.568.670.8104.695.4132.858.5
Zr65.466.164.172.752.868.166.3413450436115
Nb3.333.483.003.403.003.213.5028.4731.1429.224.04
Hf1.711.811.511.771.421.601.848.8810.009.741.94
Ta0.350.260.200.250.210.210.211.601.701.710.23
No22232425262728293031
Sample,NoDM-27/46DM-27/65DM-27/86.1DM-27/100DM-27/127DM-27/142.3DM-27/175.3TK-4TK-3OKG-13/43.7
SiO249.2248.5649.8644.6648.6738.7032.7143.1840.0049.66
TiO21.110.940.810.880.630.571.170.560.410.37
Al2O315.6615.2915.9415.6618.719.8013.628.355.9617.34
Fe2O311.059.838.1210.478.7315.2619.3216.9618.207.59
MnO0.130.120.130.160.140.200.130.220.230.12
MgO4.515.515.597.948.0424.505.7222.6127.078.81
CaO9.7711.9113.2615.0110.825.256.555.424.4014.02
Na2O5.154.443.522.312.251.012.520.910.461.94
K2O0.370.390.250.470.260.360.890.250.170.20
P2O50.250.170.150.550.100.120.490.070.080.03
LOI 2.382.511.961.421.251.962.82
Rb10.09.63.48.14.99.225.42.783.031.24
Sr3622942772302481163477.516.123.63
Y24.522.719.915.815.510.117.4121117262
Ba569578771138534012.68.59.5
La9.206.635.284.724.943.2116.8775.545.790.0
Ce21.1716.3713.0411.3011.417.5438.804.102.362.80
Pr2.722.201.821.521.511.014.429.485.336.32
Nd12.710.88.957.407.294.9818.71.300.750.87
Sm3.302.962.522.052.001.323.746.133.604.26
Eu1.050.990.870.760.800.451.151.701.031.23
Gd4.103.773.292.672.541.693.690.570.350.59
Tb0.660.620.550.430.420.280.552.031.311.49
Dy4.414.163.632.952.901.883.370.340.220.26
Ho0.920.850.730.600.600.390.652.261.491.73
Er2.652.372.311.631.621.111.710.470.310.35
Tm0.370.350.310.240.240.170.261.380.921.01
Yb2.602.322.091.661.681.111.670.190.130.14
Lu0.380.350.310.250.250.170.261.310.890.95
Pb0.800.491.931.492.633.1114.130.200.140.14
Th1.471.211.020.760.960.521.874.103.813.71
U0.570.410.360.300.350.240.890.490.350.32
Sc33.345.649.348.725.521.721.20.180.070.09
V336266222205192106203150107224
Cr28421515213844732305
Co43.839.834.142.048.0132.4365.920523153
Ni86.068.374.612921414811263840213974304
Cu14166.661.795.499.09441061924284509361
Zn73.264.353.268.5114.2113.1183.56.0730.252.3
Zr11811611591.065.535.711438.625.524.6
Nb4.864.213.652.713.211.7612.132.081.581.93
Hf2.582.141.761.521.600.842.250.990.750.67
Ta0.290.250.230.160.200.100.670.130.100.11
Note: Samples. N: 1–20—Khalil area, 21–28—Norilsk area (Norilsk 1 intrusion), 29–31—Dzhaltulsky massif.
Table 6. Comparison of the mineralogical and geochemical features of the volcanic rocks.
Table 6. Comparison of the mineralogical and geochemical features of the volcanic rocks.
FormationArea, SiteSample NoTexture, StructureMineralsMgO, wt.%TiO2, wt.%Na2O+K2O, wt.%
Ivakinsky
P3iv
Norilsk,
Lama Lake
4270
4270/4
porphyric
porphyric
3.6
3.4
3.9
2.4
4.3
5.0
Syverminsky
T1sv
Kulyumber,
Khalil
X-3-2
X-3-3
X-28
(X-20
X-20
X-21/3
X-22
X-24
X-26)
X-37 tuff
tholeiitic
 
 
 tholeiitic-
poikilophytic
An40-55,
Cpx Mg#
4.0
3.4
5.7
(3.4–6.9)
 
 
 
 
 5.9
1.6
1.7
1.6
(1.2–1.8)
 
 
 
 
 1.0
6.4
7.1
5.4
(5.2–6.3)
 
 
 
 
 4.1
Kulyumber,
Kaya
3.20/1
3.21/1
3.23/1
poikilophytic 5.6
6.1
5.8
1.6
1.4
1.3
4.8
2.7
2.8
Norilsk,
Lama Lake
4270/5
4270/6
4270/8
4270/9
4270/12
tholeiitic
poikil-ophytic
tholeiitic
poikiloph.
6.1
5.1
5.1
5.9
6.0
1.6
1.8
1.9
1.7
2.0
2.6
3.4
3.7
2.4
3.0
Gudchikhinsky
T1sv
Kulyumber,
Khalil
X-27aphyricFo76-78
An60-62
CpxMg#70, Opx
8.01.24.1
Norilsk,
Lama Lake,
Vologochan
75/2
Ov-6/622
porphyric
porphyric
Fo78-82,An72-80,
Cpx Mg#84
10.4
19.2
1.7
1.1
2.3
1.1
Khakanchansky
T1hk
Kulyumber,
Khalil
X-0Vitro-classticGlass,
Cpx, Pl
5.61.15.0
Norilsk,
Iken river
76/2aVitro-classtic 8.71.02.3
Tuklonsky
T1tk
Norilsk,
Iken river
76/1tholeiiticAn65-78
Cpx Mg#78-84
9.30.93.0
FormationArea, Site,Sampe, No(La/Sm)n(Gd/Yb)n(U/Nb)n87Sr/
86Sri
εNd204Pb/
208Pbi
Ivakinsky
P3iv
Norilsk,
Lama Lake
4270
4270/4
2.7
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.7
2.1
Syverminsky
T1sv
Kulyumber,
Khalil
X-3-2
X-3-3
X-28
(X-20
X-20
X-21/3
X-22
X-24
X-26)
X-37 tuff
3.1
2.4
2.4
(2.3–
2.7)
 
 
 
 
 2.5
1.5
1.9
1.9
(1.5–
1.8)
 
 
 
 
 1.6
2.8
3.5
2.1
(2.5–
2.6)
 
 
 
 
 3.0
0.70737
0.70791
0.70723
−3.1
−3.1
−3.0
18.7713
18.4227
19.2021
Kulyumber,
Kaya
3.20/1
3.21/1
3.23/1
3.3
2.3
3.6
1.8
2.0
1.9
3.2
2.0
2.6
Norilsk,
Lama Lake
4270/5
4270/6
4270/8
4270/9
4270/12
2.8
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.5
1.9
1.8
1.9
1.9
2.0
1.5
2.1
2.2
2.4
1.4
Gudchikhinsky
T1sv
Kulyumber,
Khalil
X-27 2.32.00.7
Norilsk,
Lama Lake,
Vologochan
75/2
 
 Ov-6/622
1.5
 
 1.6
2.0
 
 2.0
1.8
 
 2.4
0.705443.918.0827
Khakanchansky
T1hk
Kulyumber,
Khalil
X-03.21.53.3
Norilsk,
Iken river
76/2a2.11.53.20.70731−2.518.1548
Tuklonsky
T1tk
Norilsk,
Iken river
76/12.71.44.70.70733−4.517.7263
Table 7. Comparison of mineralogical and geochemical features of the intrusive rocks.
Table 7. Comparison of mineralogical and geochemical features of the intrusive rocks.
Intrusive
Complex
Supposed
Intrusive
Complex
Area, Site,
Intrusion No
Samples,
No
TextureMineralsMgO,
wt.%
TiO2, wt.%Na2O+K2O,
wt.%
ErgalakhskyErgalakhskyKulyumber
Khalil, Intrusion 1
X-40
X-48
poikil-
ophytic
An 39-53
Cpx
Fo 42-52
3.1
3.1
2.4
2.4
5.4
5.3
KatangskyKyreyskyKulyumber,
Khalil,
Khakil Intrusion 2
(X-7, X-8, X-18, X-19,X-25,X-35)poikil-ophytic
doleritic,
Fo 49-56
An
Cpx
Opx
5.0–7.41.3–1.6
1.8
3.1–5.0
KatangskyKatangskyKulyumber,
Khalil,
Intrusion 4
X-6
X-15
An56-70
Cpx Mg # 53-73Fo43Opx Mg #58-69
6.51.63.9
Norilsk-typeKatangskyKulyumber,
Khalil,
Intrusion 3
X-29-
X-34,
X-43
X-44
7.9–8.60.9–1.02.3–2.4
KyreyskyKyreyskyKureysky,
Dzhaltulsky
OKG-13,
T-3,4
Fo 72-73
Cpx Mg# 77-78
8.8–27.10.4–0.60.6–2.1
NorilskNorilskNorilsk,
Norilsk 1
DM-
27
Fo 46-80
CpxMg# 76-84
4.5–24.50.6–1.21.4–5.5
Intrusive
Complex
Supposed
Intrusive
Complex
Area, Site,
Intrusion No
Samples,
No
(La/Sm)n(Gd/Yb)n(U/Nb)n(LaYb)nIntrusive
Complex
ErgalakhskyErgalakhskyKulyumber
Khalil, Intrusion 1
X-40
X-48
2.5
2.6
1.8
1.9
1.5
1.5
7.9
7.9
Ergalakhsky
KatangskyKyreyskyKulyumber,
Khalil,
Khakil Intrusion 2
(X-7, X-8, X-18, X-19,X-25X-35)1.5–1.81.2–1.42.7–4.61.8–2.7Katangsky
KatangskyKatangskyKulyumber,
Khalil,
Intrusion 4
X-61.41.34.51.9Katangsky
Norilsk-typeKatangskyKulyumber,
Khalil,
Intrusion 3
X-29-X-34,
X-43,
X-44
1.4–1.61.3–1.41.6–2.22.1–2.5Norilsk-type
KyreyskyKyreyskyKureysky,
Dzhaltulsky
OKG-13,
T-3,4
1.5–1.61.2–1.31.5–2.91.9–2.3Kyreysky
NorilskNorilskNorilsk,
Norilsk 1
DM-
27
1.5–1.81.33.3–4.51.8–2.0Norilsk

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Krivolutskaya, N.; Belyatsky, B.; Gongalsky, B.; Dolgal, A.; Lapkovsky, A.; Malitch, K.; Taskaev, V.; Svirskaya, N. Petrographical and Mineralogical Characteristics of Magmatic Rocks in the Northwestern Siberian Traps Province, Kulyumber River Valley. Part I: Rocks of the Khalil and Kaya Sites. Minerals 2020, 10, 409. https://doi.org/10.3390/min10050409

AMA Style

Krivolutskaya N, Belyatsky B, Gongalsky B, Dolgal A, Lapkovsky A, Malitch K, Taskaev V, Svirskaya N. Petrographical and Mineralogical Characteristics of Magmatic Rocks in the Northwestern Siberian Traps Province, Kulyumber River Valley. Part I: Rocks of the Khalil and Kaya Sites. Minerals. 2020; 10(5):409. https://doi.org/10.3390/min10050409

Chicago/Turabian Style

Krivolutskaya, Nadezhda, Boris Belyatsky, Bronislav Gongalsky, Alexander Dolgal, Andrey Lapkovsky, Kreshimir Malitch, Vladimir Taskaev, and Natalya Svirskaya. 2020. "Petrographical and Mineralogical Characteristics of Magmatic Rocks in the Northwestern Siberian Traps Province, Kulyumber River Valley. Part I: Rocks of the Khalil and Kaya Sites" Minerals 10, no. 5: 409. https://doi.org/10.3390/min10050409

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop