Next Article in Journal
Increased As Adsorption on Maghemite-Containing Red Mud Prepared by the Alkali Fusion-Leaching Method
Next Article in Special Issue
The Main Anorthosite Layer of the West-Pana Intrusion, Kola Region: Geology and U-Pb Age Dating
Previous Article in Journal
MVT-Like Fluorite Deposits and Oligocene Magmatic-Hydrothermal Fluorite–Be–U–Mo–P–V Overprints in Northern Coahuila, Mexico
Previous Article in Special Issue
Beryllium Mineralogy of the Kola Peninsula, Russia—A Review
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Minerals
Volume 9
Issue 1
10.3390/min9010059
minerals-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Long-Lived Mantle Plume and Polyphase Evolution of Palaeoproterozoic PGE Intrusions in the Fennoscandian Shield

by
Tamara Bayanova
1,*,
Aleksey Korchagin
1,
Alexander Mitrofanov
2,
Pavel Serov
1,
Nadezhda Ekimova
1,
Elena Nitkina
1,
Igor Kamensky
1,
Dmitry Elizarov
1 and
Milosh Huber
3
1
Geological Institute, Kola Science Centre, Russian Academy of Sciences, 184209 Apatity, Russia
2
SRK Consulting, Toronto, ON M4C 1T2, Canada
3
Department of Earth Sciences and Spatial Management, Maria Curie-Skłodowska University, 520-031 Lublin, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Minerals 2019, 9(1), 59; https://doi.org/10.3390/min9010059
Submission received: 18 October 2018 / Revised: 14 January 2019 / Accepted: 15 January 2019 / Published: 18 January 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Arctic Mineral Resources: Science and Technology)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The NE Fennoscandian Shield comprises the Northern Belt in Finland and the Southern Belt in Karelia. They host mafic-ultramafic layered Cu-Ni-Cr and Pt-Pd-bearing intrusions. Precise U-Pb and Sm-Nd analyses indicate the 130-Ma evolution of these intrusions, with major events at 2.53, 2.50, 2.45, and 2.40 Ga. Barren phases were dated at 2.53 Ga for orthopyroxenites and olivine gabbro in the Fedorovo-Pansky massif. PGE-bearing phases of gabbronorites (Pechenga, Fedorovo-Pansky, Monchetundra massifs) and norites (Monchepluton) are 2.50 Ga old. Anorthosites of Mt. Generalskaya (Pechenga), the Fedorovo-Pansky, and Monchetundra massifs occurred at 2.45 Ga. This event produced layered PGE-bearing intrusions in Finland (Penikat, Kemi, Koitelainen) and mafic intrusions in Karelia. The Imandra lopolith dikes occurred at the final phase (2.40 Ga). Slightly negative εNd and ISr values (0.703–0.704) suggest that intrusions originated from an enriched mantle reservoir. Low 3He/4He ratios in accessory minerals (ilmenite and magnetite) indicate an upper mantle source. Large-scale correlations link the Fennoscandian Shield with the Superior and Wyoming cratons.

1. Introduction

The NE Fennoscandian (Baltic) Shield covers the Archaean crust formed at 3.5–2.7 Ga [1,2]. The post-Archaean evolution is mainly reflected in rifting and emplacement of mafic-ultramafic complexes along NE-trending structures. The NE Baltic Shield hosts the Southern (Fenno-Karelian) Belt (FKB) and the Northern (Kola) Belt (KB) that we studied in detail in our profound research [3].
FKB extends 350 km along the northern edge of the Karelian craton. It comprises Palaeoproterozoic mafic-ultramafic layered bodies in Finland (e.g., Penikat, Kemi) [4,5,6], Sweden (Tornio intrusion), and Russia (Olanga group) [7] that occurred in similar geodynamic settings [8].
KB strikes northwestwards for over 500 km. It borders the SW edge of the Archaean Kola-Norwegian Block and the Northern and Southern edges of the Palaeoproterozoic Pechenga-Imandra-Varzuga rift. There are several layered mafic-ultramafic bodies [7]. Layered PGE-bearing pyroxenite-norite-gabbro-anorthosite intrusions occur at the boundaries between early Proterozoic rifts lying over the Archaean basement [9,10].
The purpose of this work is a complex study of Palaeoproterozoic Pt-Pd and Cu-Ni intrusions that are widespread in the NE Baltic Shield. We use a set of isotope techniques to define precision ages of formation of reefs, lower and upper parts of layered intrusions, host rocks, and cutting dyke series. We also aimed at studying sources of primary magmas and primary reservoirs. The main objective of this research is to compare new isotope data with those on other Palaeoproterozoic intrusions of the Finnish group, Northern America, and Canada. This would corroborate the model of the plume mantle source for all Palaeoproterozoic intrusions.
The current study continues our investigations [3], but substantiates it with new isotope geochronological data. It allowed us to define that PGE-bearing intrusions of the Fennoscandian Shield referred to the enriched mantle reservoir EM-1. This paper provides new data showing that magmatism in the Kola-Karelian Province correlates with the peak of mafic-ultramafic magmatism in the Superior and Wyoming provinces (2.45 Ga).

2. Geological Setting

The Palaeoproterozoic East Scandinavian Large Igneous Province (LIP) occurs in the NE Fennoscandian Shield (Figure 1). Its granulite and gneiss-migmatite basement originated at >2550 Ma. This province had several stages of magmatism and sedimentation separated by breaks (conglomerates). The Sumian stage (2550–2400 Ma) was crucial for the production of Pt-Pd ores [9,10]. In FKB, the magmatism was most active at 2450 to 2400 Ma [4,10,11,12,13,14,15,16]. In KB, PGE-bearing intrusions formed at 2530–2450 Ma.
The Fedorovo-Pansky Layered Complex strikes north-westwards for >60 km and dips Southwestwards at an angle of 30–35° (Figure 2). The Fedorov, Lastjavr, Western and Eastern Pansky are its major blocks [9]. This complex is bordered by the Archaean Keivy terrain and the Palaeoproterozoic Imandra-Varzuga rift. In the North, the complex borders alkaline granites of the White Tundra intrusion. Their U-Pb age on zircon is 2654 + 15 Ma [17]. The contact of the Western Pansky Block with the Imandra-Varzuga volcano-sedimentary sequence mostly has Quaternary deposits. However, drill and excavation works to the South of Mt. Kamennik reveal a strongly sheared and metamorphosed contact between the intrusion and overlying Palaeoproterozoic volcano-sedimentary rocks.
The authors had earlier studied the Fedorovo-Pansky massif using a full set of geological, mineralogical, petrographical, and geochemical methods [3]. This allowed us to identify the block structure of the massif and define zones with different composition, age, and mineralization. Provided below is a compilation of previously obtained data [3] and results of this study.
The Fedorovo-Pansky Complex consists of Marginal, Taxitic, and Norite zones (Figure 2). The Marginal Zone contains plagioclase-amphibole schists, massive fine-grained norites, and gabbronorites. The Taxitic Zone contains ore-bearing gabbronorites (2485 Ma), xenoliths of plagioclase-bearing pyroxenite and norite (2526–2516 Ma), syngenetic and magmatic ores (Pt and Pd sulfides, Cu and Ni sulfides with Pt, Pd and Au, bismuth-tellurides and arsenides). The Norite Zone hosts harzburgite and plagioclase-bearing pyroxenite with Cu-Ni-PGE mineralization in the lower part. These rocks are chromium-rich (up to 1000 ppm) and contain chromite. The same mineralization occur in FKB intrusions [5].
The Fedorov Block is a part of the Fedorovo-Pansky Complex. The Layered Lower Horizon (LLH) of its Main Gabbronorite Zone is composed of gabbronorite, norite, pyroxenite and interlayers of leucocratic gabbro and anorthosite, and reef-type PGE deposit. The Upper Layered Horizon (ULH) consists of olivine-bearing troctolite, norite, gabbronorite, and anorthosite. It comprises several layers of PGE-rich ore (Pd > Pt) [9]. The U-Pb age of the ULH rocks on single-grain zircon and baddeleyite is 2447 + 12 Ma. This age shows that ULH rocks are the youngest in the Fedorovo-Pansky Complex.
The Fedorov Tundra Block is in the West of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif. It contains mafic and rare ultramafic rocks, mostly gabbronorites with highly heterogeneous mineral grains. The contact-type Cu, Ni, and PGE mineralization is economically valuable.
There are three mineral types of the sulfide mineralization: pyrrhotite, pyrrhotite-chalcopyrite, and pentlandite-chalcopyrite-pyrrhotite. The latter type is best-valued commercially, since it contains the complex PGE mineralization.
Major ore minerals are chalcopyrite, pyrrhotite and pentlandite. Their average proportions recalculated for 100% sulfide are 41%, 35%, and 24%, respectively. In the total amount of sulfides, their portion is 95–100%. Secondary and accessory minerals are pyrite, ilmenite, magnetite, mackinawite, marcasite, cubanite, millerite, bornite, sphalerite, and violarite.
Besides pentlandite, chalcopyrite and pyrrhotite may also host minor PGE, though lower than pentlandite [18], i.e., kotulskite, merenskyite, braggite, stillwaterite, vysotskite, and sobolevskite for palladium; braggite, moncheite, merenskyite, and sperrylite for platinum; and gold-silver alloys for gold [19,20]. In total, 29 PGE and gold minerals, as well as eight PGE phases with no status of individual minerals, have been recorded in the ore. Microprobe analyses of their chemical compositions have been conducted in the Geological Institute KSC RAS [20,21].

3. Materials and Methods

U-Pb (TIMS) Method with 208Pb/235U Tracer [12,22,23,24,25], Zircon ID-TIMS U-Pb Analyses (with a 205Pb Spike) [12,24,25], ID-TIMS Sm-Nd Analyses of Silicates [12,22,23,26,27], ID-TIMS Rb-Sr Analyses [12,28], ID-TIMS Sm-Nd Analyses of Sulfides [12,13,23,24,26,29,30,31], Electron Microprobe and LA-ICP-MS Major and Trace Element Analyses [32] have been used to study the samples.

3.1. Isotope Analyses

The U-Pb concordia plot and Sm-Nd isochron methods are applied to define the age of crystallization of the rocks. U-Pb zircon and baddeleyite ages for the same sample are commonly coherent. They indicate a similar age of the magma crystallization and subsequent transformations. Coordinates of baddeleyites are near the concordia line. However, it is difficult to apply this method due to minor amounts of zircon and baddeleyite grains in these rocks.
Compared to the precise U-Pb systematics with an error of ca. 0.1%, the Sm-Nd method is not an accurate geochronometer (error of ca. 2–3%). However, it allows defining the crystallization age of mafic rocks using major rock-forming minerals. The method is especially important for dating rocks with syngenetic ore minerals. It has been used to date (2482 ± 36 Ma) the early gabbronorite and second anorthosite (2467 ± 39 Ma) ore bodies in the Fedorovo-Pansky deposit. This deposit is considered to be economically important [33].
Sm-Nd ages of the KB mafic-ultramafic intrusions overlap because of large errors. The estimations are compatible with U-Pb ages obtained on zircon and baddeleyite. They are especially important for marginal fast-crystallizing rocks of the Taxitic Zone within the Fedorovo-Pansky Complex. The ages of early barren orthopyroxenite and gabbro are 2521 ± 42 Ma and 2516 ± 35 Ma (Sm-Nd method) and 2526 ± 6 Ma and 2516 ± 7 Ma (U-Pb method). The ore-bearing norite of the Fedorov Block yields ages of 2482 ± 36 Ma (Sm-Nd method) and 2485 ± 9 Ma (U-Pb method) [34,35].
Importantly, the Sm-Nd method provides valuable petrological and geochemical markers, i.e., εNd(T) and TDM. The εNd value shows a degree of the mantle source depletion, while TDM indicates an approximate age of melt extraction from the mantle protolith [35].
The Rb-Sr whole-rock and mineral-isochron method, specific trace elements (Cu, Ni, Ti, V, and LREE), εNd (2.5 Ga) and 4He/3He data, values of initial 87Sr/86Sr (ISr[2.5 Ga]) indicate an enriched 2.5 Ga-old mantle reservoir [36]. It is similar with the modern EM-I reservoir [37,38] and corroborated by the Re-Os systematics [39].

3.2. LA-ICP-MS

The distribution of rare and precious metals in sulfide parageneses has been first studied in detail using the laser ablation inductively coupled magma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS). It enables detecting regular patterns of the element distribution with a high degree of accuracy. The results indicate that pentlandite in sulfide parageneses of the Fedorov Tundra deposit has commercially valuable PGE mineralization.
The method of LA-ICP-MS (UP-213 laser, high-resolution Element-XR mass spectrometer with ionization) has been applied to analyze concentrations of Cr, Co, As, Se, Ru, Rh, Pd, Ag, Cd, Sb, Re, Os, Ir, Pt, Au, Tl, Pb, and Bi in sulfides. The following parameters have been accepted for the analysis: crater diameter is 40 μm, impulse frequency of laser radiation is 4 Hz. The samples have been analyzed by blocks, which were prepared using the Element XR software. Standard samples have been measured at the beginning and end of each block. Internal laboratory sulfide standards have been used for analysis. The deviation by calibration standards is 10–20%. Fe has been applied, having quite high concentrations in relation to background values. It occurs in all of the studied samples and is the most homogeneously distributed in phases.
Regional PGE-bearing deposits are represented by the basal and reef-like types. According to modern economic evaluation, the basal type is preferable for mining, even if the PGE content (1–3 ppm) is lower than in reef-type deposits (>5 ppm). Basal deposits are thicker and contain more Pt, Cu, and especially, Ni.
In the Eastern Fennoscandian Shield, the Palaeoproterozoic magmatic activity is associated with the formation of Cu-Ni (±PGE), Pt-Pd (Rh, ±Cu, Ni, Au), Cr, and Ti-V deposits [40,41]. The Fedorov deposit is best-valued for PGE (Pt, Pd, Rh), but Ni, Cu, and Au are also economically important [10]. Ore-forming magmatic and post-magmatic processes are closely related to the Taxitic Zone gabbronorite of the 2485 ± 9 Ma magmatic pulse. Reef-type deposits (Pt-Pd (±Cu, Ni, Rh, Au) and ore occurrences of the Western Pansky Block (Fedorovo-Pansky Complex) are genetically associated with pegmatoid leucogabbro and anorthosite rich in late-stage fluids. Portions of this magma produce additional injections of ca. 2500 Ma, ca. 2470 Ma (the Lower, Northern PGE reef) and ca. 2450 Ma (the Upper, Southern PGE reef of the Western Pansky Block and PGE-bearing mineralization of Mt. Generalskaya intrusion). These magma injections are quite similar in their prevalence of Pd over Pt, ore mineral composition [9] and isotope geochemistry of the Sm-Nd and Rb-Sr systems. εNd values for these rocks vary from −2.1 to −2.3. This may indicate a single long-lived enriched magmatic source.
High contents of Cr (>1000 ppm) are typical of lower mafic-ultramafic rocks from layered intrusions in the Baltic Shield [4,5]. The chromite mineralization occurs in basal series of the Monchepluton, Fedorovo-Pansky Complex, Imandra lopolith (Russia), Penikat [42] and Narkaus intrusions (Finland), chromite deposits of the Kemi intrusion (Finland) [43] and Dunite Block (Monchepluton, Russia). In contrast, the Fe-Ti-V mineralization of the Mustavaara intrusion (Finland) tends to occur in the leucocratic-most parts of layered series, as well as in leucogabbro-anorthosite and gabbro-diorite of the Imandra lopolith (Russia) and Koillismaa Complex (Finland).

4. Results

4.1. Fedorovo-Pansky Massif: U-Pb and Sm-Nd Isotope Data

Several large samples have been selected in the Fedorovo-Pansky Complex for further isotope analyses. Medium- and coarse-grained gabbronorite have been sampled in LLH of the Eastern Kievey area. Three types of zircons (transparent, with a vitreous luster) have been separated [3]: Pan-1, regular bipyramidal-prismatic crystals of up to 120 μm; Pan-2, fragments of prismatic crystals; and Pan-3, pyramidal apices of crystals of 80–100 μm. In immersion view, all the zircons display a simple structure with fine zoning and cross jointing.
The previously obtained data show that the crystallization time of the main gabbronorite phase of LLH is 2491 ± 1.5 Ma, since the upper intersection age is 2491 ± 1.5 Ma (MSWD = 0.05) and the lower intersection is at zero and indicates the loss of Pb (Figure 3a, Table 1) [3,7,44]. The same zircon sample has been analyzed at the Royal Ontario Museum laboratory (Canada). It proved slightly older (2501.5 ± 1.7 Ma) [45].
In the framework of this research, the authors have conducted new measurements using single zircon grains from the main PGE gabbronorite phase from the old collection (Figure 3b, Table 2) and obtained the similar age of 2500 ± 3 Ma. The isotope Sm-Nd data show the age of the same gabbronorite on the main rock-forming minerals and whole-rock is 2487 ± 51 Ma (MSWD = 1.5) [16].
In contrast with the zircon age, the rock-forming minerals originate at the post-magmatic stage. However, considering measurement errors, Sm-Nd ages are suggested to be close to the U-Pb ones.
Three types of zircon have been extracted from PGE-bearing gabbro-pegmatite (LLH). Zircons from samples P-8, D-15 and D-18 have been used for isotope analyses [3]. The concordant U-Pb age on zircons from PGE-bearing gabbro-pegmatite (LLH) is 2470 ± 9 Ma (MSWD = 0.37) (Figure 3a, Table 1). The lower intersection of the discordia line (c. 300 Ma) indicates a loss of Pb. This indicates the Palaeozoic tectonic activity in the Eastern Baltic Shield [3,46].
Analyses of whole-rock and rock-forming silicate and sulfide minerals from gabbro pegmatite give a Sm-Nd age of 2467 ± 39 Ma, MSWD = 1.8. εNd(T) is negative with −1.4 ± 0.5 (Figure 4a, Table 3). Noteworthy, these ages are quite similar within the measurement error.
The U-Pb age is identical to the Sm-Nd one. Hence, we can suggest a very narrow closure temperature in the U-Pb (zircon) and Sm-Nd (rock-forming and sulfide minerals) systematics.
Three types of zircon and two varieties of baddeleyite (Sample P6-1) have been separated in ULH of the Southern Suleypahk area. The authors had previously studied and described zircons from samples Pb-1, Pb-2 and Pb-3 [3]. The U-Pb results for these samples define a discordia line intersecting the concordia curve at 2447 ± 12 Ma, MSWD = 2.7 (Figure 5a, Table 1). This age indicates the origin of late phase anorthosite, since baddeleyite forms mainly in residual igneous melts [3,47].
A similar age is obtained from Sm-Nd data on rock-forming minerals of ULH anorthosite, i.e., 2442 ± 74 Ma with slightly negative εNd(T) = −1.8 ± 0.5, MSWD = 0.24 (Figure 5b, Table 4).
The U-Pb zircon age of early barren orthopyroxenite (F-3) from the Fedorov Block (2526 ± 6 Ma) marks the emplacement time (Figure 6a, Table 1). The similar U-Pb age (Figure 6b, Table 1) has also been obtained using zircon from barren olivine gabbro (F-4). Cu-Ni-PGE-bearing taxitic gabbronorites (F-2) from the Fedorov Block (Figure 6c, Table 1) yield a U-Pb age on zircon of 2485 ± 9 Ma [34].
Isotope analyses of these samples using the whole rock, pyroxene and plagioclase yield ages that correspond to the respective U-Pb ages on zircon (Figure 6d–f). Table 5 provides a compilation of the previously obtained results [3] and new results of isotope geochemical research.

4.2. Fedorovo Tundra Deposit: Trace Element Compositions

Three samples from different areas of the Fedorovo Tundra deposit have been investigated: sample BGF-237-132 from olivine-bearing gabbronorite of the Bolshoy Ikhtegipakhk, samples BGF-487-50.5 and BGF-495-76.5 from gabbronorite of the Pakhkvaraka area.
Mantle normalized diagrams (Figure 7 and Figure 8, Table 6) show ratios of the obtained contents for each measured component normalized to the primitive mantle. Dashed areas indicate dispersion of the obtained results.
Pentlandite is the main concentrator of Co and PGEs (Pd, Ru, and Pt). Since Pt and Pd are the best-valued commercial minerals of the Fedorovo Tundra deposit, pentlandite can be considered the most important among economic sulfide minerals of this deposit, along with PGMs. However, the abundance of pentlandite is much higher.
Pyrrhotite has a significant content of Cr and PGEs (Ir and Os). Pyrrhotite is the major concentrator of As and Bi.
Chalcopyrite accumulates almost all Ag and a significant proportion of Au. This mineral has high contents of Pb and Rh either.
Se, Re, Sn, and Ta are quite homogeneously distributed in all of the three mineral phases.

4.3. Penikat (Sompuyarvi reef) and Kemi Intrusions: Sm-Nd and U-Pb Geochronology

Gabbronorites (about 30 kg) were sampled in a geological field trip headed by M. Iljina (Geological Survey of Finland) to the Penikat and Kemi intrusions in 2008. The concordant age on 2 types of zircon from gabbronorite is 2430 ± 2 Ma. The concordant age on three types of zircon from the Kemi sample is 2447 ± 4 Ma (Figure 9b,c, Table 7).
The Sm-Nd isotope ages of rock-forming and sulfide minerals are much coeval to the U-Pb zircon data that suggested a very narrow closure temperature at the time of origination.
The whole rock, silicates and sulfides of the Penikat intrusion have a Sm-Nd age of 2426 ± 38 Ma (MSWD = 0.2) (Figure 9a, Table 8). It agrees with the Sm-Nd age of 2410 ± 64 Ma determined for the Penikat intrusion earlier [51]. Importantly, sulfide data lie on the isochron as well. It testifies to the coincidence of sulfide formation and the rock crystallization. Table 9 provides compiled isotope data obtained in previous [3] and the current research.

5. Discussion

A full set of advanced isotope geochronological methods has been applied to study the largest and ore-richest deposits of the Fedorovo-Pansky Complex. Table 10 is a data base of U-Pb and Sm-Nd ages of PGE layered intrusions in the Fennoscandian Shield. It includes both available and new data obtained by the authors of this study.
Previously, the authors had suggested that these PGE intrusions occurred at the same interval [3]. Based on U-Pb and Sm-Nd data, the authors defined zones with different ages in the Fedorov Block, Western Pansky Block of the Fedorovo-Pansky Complex, Monchetundra massif, Mt. Generalskaya and Imandra lopolith [3]. This study corroborates and substantiates results of the previous research. New data prove that, in the suggested hypothesis, there were four pulses of the magmatic activity associated with the formation of PGE intrusions of the Fennoscandian Shield in the interval 2.53–2.40 Ga.
The Fedorov Block of the Fedorovo-Pansky Complex represents an independent magma chamber. Its rocks and ores differ significantly from those of the Western Pansky Block [3,10]. A 2 km-thick rock sequence stretches from as a layered or differentiated syngenetic series. The age of melanocratic pyroxenite-norite-gabbronorite-gabbro between the Marginal Zone to the Lower Gabbro Zone is 2526 ± 6 and 2516 ± 7 Ma. The Taxitic Zone is intruded by concordant Cu-Ni-PGE-bearing gabbronorite (Fedorov deposit) of the second-pulse magmatic injection (2485 ± 9 Ma).
The Western Pansky Block in the Main Gabbronorite Zone, excluding LLH and probably the upper part (above 3000 m), is a single syngenetic series of relatively leucocratic, mainly olivine-free gabbronorite-gabbro. They crystallized at 2526–2485 Ma. The Norite and Marginal Zones occur in the lower part of the Block. The Marginal Zone contains the poor disseminated Cu-Ni-PGE mineralization. This rock series can be correlated with certain parts of the Fedorov Block. LLH is 40–80 m-thick. It has a unique structure with dominant leucocratic anorthositic rocks. The exposed part of the horizon strikes for almost 15 km and can be traced in boreholes down to a depth of 500 m [8]. Morphologically, the horizon seems to be a part of a single layered series. Nevertheless, there are anorthositic bodies with cross-cutting contacts and apophyses in outcrops [19]. Cumulus plagioclase compositions of the rocks in the horizon are different from those in surrounding rocks. The age of PGE-bearing leucogabbro-pegmatite (2470 ± 9 Ma) is precisely defined by concordant and near-concordant U-Pb data on zircon. It is slightly younger than ages of surrounding rocks (e.g., 2491 ± 1.5 Ma and 2500 ± 3 Ma). The LLH rocks, especially the anorthosite and PGE mineralization, are likely to represent an independent magmatic pulse.
The upper part and olivine-bearing rocks of the Western Pansky Block differ from the main layered units of the Block in rock, mineral and PGE mineralization composition [9]. Up to date, only one reliable U-Pb age (2447 ± 12 Ma) has been obtained for PGE-bearing anorthosite in the block. New Sm-Nd estimates yield an age of 2467 ± 39 Ma, which is much coeval to the U-Pb data.
The early magmatic activity at ca. 2.5 Ga reflects in gabbronorites of the Monchetundra (2505 ± 6 and 2501 ± 8 Ma) and Mt. Generalskaya (2496 ± 10 Ma). The magmatic activity that produced anorthosite took place at ca. 2470 and 2450 Ma. It also contributed to a layered series of the Chunatundra (2467 ± 7 Ma) and Mt. Generalskaya (2446 ± 10 Ma), Monchetundra gabbro (2453 ± 4 Ma) and pegmatoid gabbronorite of the Ostrovsky intrusion (2445 ± 11 Ma) (Table 10) [12].
The Imandra lopolith is the youngest large layered intrusion in KB. It differs from other KB intrusions both in its emplacement age and metallogeny. There are five U-Pb zircon and baddeleyite ages for the rocks of the main magmatic pulse. They were formed at 2445–2434 Ma.
Thus, several intrusions have been established in KB, including at least four intrusions (or phases) in the Fedorovo-Pansky Complex: a 2526–2516 Ma barren intrusion and three ore-bearing ones of 2505–2485, 2470, and 2450 Ma. For similar intrusions of FKB, e.g., the Penikat intrusion in Finland, five intrusions varying in geochemistry only have been distinguished from the same deep chamber [5].
A total duration for magmatic processes of over 130 Ma in the KB intrusions is surprising. The multi-phase magmatic duration of the FKB intrusions was short-term and took place about 2.44 Ga years ago. However, there are only a few U-Pb precise age estimations for the FKB intrusions [5]. Results for the Kola prove that layering of the intrusions with thinly-differentiated horizons and PGE reefs was not contemporaneous (or syngenetic). It was defined that each intrusion has its own metallogentic trend in time and space.
The magmatic activity revealed from 2.53 to 2.40 Ga with intrusions at 2.53, 2.50, 2.45, and 2.40 Ga. These four intrusions are based on precise U-Pb ages on single zircon and baddeleyite grains. The first three intrusions are corroborated by the Sm-Nd mineral isochron ages within the measurement error.
Since the Palaeoproterozoic (2.53 Ga), magmatic processes have affected most of the Kola-Lapland-Karelian province, after the continental crust became mature by ca. 2.55 Ga in the Neoarchaean [65]. Here, up to 3 km-thick basaltic volcanites of the Sumian age (2.53–2.40 Ga) cover an area of more than 200 000 km2. In the north, magmatic analogues of these volcanic rocks are represented by two belts of layered intrusions and numerous dike swarms [14,66,67]. These units have similar geological, compositional and metallogenic features [68]. Jointly, they compose the East-Scandinavian LIP. Its geological settings indicate anorogenic rift-like intraplate arrangements. They link volcano-plutonic belts connecting different domains of the Palaeoarchaean Kola-Lapland-Karelia protocontinent. This resembles the early advection extensional geodynamics of passive rifting that is typical of intraplate plume processes [69,70]. Geochemical and isotope-geochemical data (εNd values −1.1 to −2.4, ISr values 0.703–0.704) indicate the single homogenous mantle source of the LIP rocks (Figure 10). This mantle source was enriched with both siderophile and lithophile elements, including LREE. This reservoir resembles the modern EM-1 source [37,38].
Isotope 4He/3He ratios are another reliable isotope tracer of mantle plume processes [56,70,71]. Their use in the Precambrian study requires further consideration. He isotope data on rocks and minerals of the KB intrusions show that the 4He/3He isotope ratios of n × 106 and n × 105 correspond to ratios of the upper mantle and differ from those of the crust (n × 108) and lower mantle (n × 104) [3,12,71]. According to these data, crustal contamination was local.
The LIP layered intrusions are directly related to the Fennoscandian Shield metallogeny [39]. The evolution of the two belts of layered mafic complex (2.53 to 2.40 Ga) encompasses a group of younger (2.44 Ga) intrusions within FKB [5,72].
The peak of the mafic-ultramafic magmatic activity in the Kola-Karelian, Superior and Wyoming provinces was at ca. 2.45 Ga (Figure 11) [3,12,67,69,72,73,74]. This study proves that layered intrusions in KB and FKB (2.53–2.40 Ga) had an intraplate nature. The Kola is considered as a part of the “greater” Karelia craton (Figure 11).
We consider a LIP as a product of a vast long-lived plume, according to geochemical data (Table 10). The studied East-Scandinavian LIP, or mafic LIP, has the following features:
  • gravity anomalies caused by a crust-mantle layer at the bottom of the crust;
  • riftogenic (anorogenic) structural ensembles with multipath extensional fault tectonics identified by the distribution of grabens and volcanic belts, dike swarms, and intrusive belts;
  • protracted polyphase tectonics and magmatism, continental discontinuities and erosion with early stages of tholeiitic-basalt (trappean), boninite-like, and subalkaline magmatism in the continental crust, possible closing stages of the Red Sea-type spreading magmatism;
  • intrusive sills, lopoliths, sheet-like bodies, large dikes and dike swarms. The intrusions are often layered and differ from rocks formed in subduction and spreading zones, with trends of thin differentiation layering, limited development of intermediate and felsic rocks, often with leucogabbro and anorthosite ends and abundant pegmatoid mafic varieties;
  • typical mantle geochemistry of rocks and ores, as registered by isotope mantle tracers: 143Nd/144Nd, 87Sr/86Sr, 187Os/188Os, and 3He/4He;
  • large orthomagmatic Cr, Ni, Cu, Co, PGE (±Au), Ti, and V deposits [18,69,72,75,76].

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.B., A.K. and P.S.; Methodology, T.B., A.M., P.S., I.K. and D.E.; Validation, T.B.; Formal Analysis, N.E., E.N. and P.S.; Investigation, T.B., A.M., P.S., N.E., E.N., I.K. and D.E.; Sampling A.K. and M.H.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, T.B.; Writing—Review & Editing, T.B. and M.H.; Supervision, T.B.

Funding

This research was funded by the Russian Foundation of Basic Researches (RFBR), grant numbers 18-35-00246, 16-05-00305 and 18-05-70082, Program of the Presidium of RAS No. 4.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank their colleagues J. Ludden, F. Corfu, W. Todt, U. Poller, L. Koval, L. Lyalina and N. Levkovich for their kind assistance in conducting the current research. The authors express their special gratitude to T.A. Miroshnichenko and E.N Steshenko for editing the manuscript and unknown reviewers for their contribution to the improvement of this paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bogdanova, S.V.; Bingen, B.; Gorbatschev, R.; Kheraskova, T.N.; Kozlov, V.I.; Puchkov, V.N.; Volozh, Y.U. The East European Craton (Baltica) before and during the assembly of Rodinia. Precambrian Res. 2008, 160, 23–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Slabunov, A.I.; Lobach-Zhuchenko, S.B.; Slabunov, A.I.; Lobach-Zhuchenko, S.B.; Bibikova, E.V.; Sorjonen-Ward, P.; Balagansky, V.V.; Volodichev, O.I.; Shchipansky, A.A.; Svetov, S.A.; et al. The Archaean nucleus of the Fennoscandian (Baltic) Shield. In European Lithosphere Dynamics; Gee, D.G., Stephenson, R.A., Eds.; Geological Society: London, UK, 2006; Volume 32, pp. 627–644. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bayanova, T.; Mitrofanov, F.; Serov, P.; Nerovich, L.; Yekimova, N.; Nitkina, E.; Kamensky, I. Layered PGE Paleoproterozoic (LIP) Intrusions in the N-E Part of the Fennoscandian Shield—Isotope Nd-Sr and 3He/4He Data, Summarizing U-Pb Ages (on Baddeleyite and Zircon), Sm-Nd Data (on Rock-Forming and Sulphide Minerals), Duration and Mineralization. In Geochronology—Methods and Case Studies/Edited by Nils-Axel Mörner; INTECH: Houston, TX, USA, 2014; pp. 143–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Alapieti, T.T. The Koillismaa layered igneous complex, Finland: Its structure, mineralogy and geochemistry, with emphasis on the distribution of chromium. Geol. Surv. Finl. 1982, 319, 116. [Google Scholar]
  5. Iljina, M.; Hanski, E. Layered mafic intrusions of the Tornio-Näränkävaara belt. In Precambrian Geology of Finland—Key to the Evolution of the Fennoscandian Shield; Lehtinen, M., Nurmi, P.A., Rämo, O.T., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherland, 2005; pp. 101–138. [Google Scholar]
  6. Vogel, D.C.; Vuollo, J.I.; Alapieti, T.T.; James, R.S. Tectonic, stratigraphic and geochemical comparison between ca. 2500-2440 Ma mafic igneous events in the Canadian and Fennoscandian Shields. Precambrian Res. 1998, 92, 89–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Mitrofanov, F.P.; Balabonin, N.L.; Bayanova, T.B. Main results from the study of the Kola PGE-bearing province, Russia. In Mineral Deposits; Papunen, H., Gorbunov, G.I., Eds.; Balkema: Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 1997; pp. 483–486. [Google Scholar]
  8. Ernst, R.E. Large Igneous Provinces; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2014; Volume 653. [Google Scholar]
  9. Mitrofanov, F.P.; Korchagin, A.U.; Dudkin, K.O.; Rundkvist, T.V. Fedorovo-Pana layered mafic intrusion (Kola peninsula, Russia): Approaches, methods and criteria for prospecting PGEs. In Exploration for Platinum-Group Elements Deposits; Short Course Delivered on Behalf of the Mineralogical Association of Canada in Oulu, Finland; University of Toronto: Toronto, ON, Canada, 2005; Volume 35, pp. 343–358. [Google Scholar]
  10. Schissel, D.; Tsvetkov, A.A.; Mitrofanov, F.P.; Korchagin, A.U. Basal platinum-group element mineralization in the Fedorov Pansky layered mafic intrusion, Kola Peninsula, Russia. Econ. Geol. 2002, 97, 1657–1677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Sharkov, Y.V. Formation of Layered Intrusions and Related Mineralization; Scientific World: Moscow, Russia, 2006; p. 364. [Google Scholar]
  12. Bayanova, T.B.; Ludden, J.; Mitrofanov, F.P. Timing and duration of Palaeoproterozoic events producing ore-bearing layered intrusions of the Baltic Shield: Metallogenic, petrological and geodynamic implications. In Palaeoproterozoic Supercontinents and Global Evolution; Reddy, S.M., Mazumder, R., Evans, D.A.D., Collins, A.S., Eds.; Geological Society: London, UK, 2009; Volume 323, pp. 165–198. [Google Scholar]
  13. Ekimova, N.A.; Serov, P.A.; Bayanova, T.B.; Elizarova, I.R.; Mitrofanov, F.P. New data on distribution of REEs in sulfide minerals and Sm-Nd dating of ore genesis of layered mafic intrusions. Dokl. Earth Sci. 2011, 436, 28–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Kullerud, K.; Skjerlie, K.P.; Corfu, F.; De La Rosa, J. The 2.40 Ga Ringvassøy mafic dikes, West Troms Basement Complex, Norway: The concluding act of early Palaeoproterozoic continental breakup. Precambrian Res. 2006, 150, 183–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Mitrofanov, F.P.; Bayanova, T.B.; Korchagin, A.U.; Groshev, N.Y.; Malitch, K.N.; Zhirov, D.V.; Mitrofanov, A.F. East Scandinavian and Noril’sk plume mafic Large Igneous Provinces of Pd-Pt ores: Geological and metallogenic comparison. Geol. Ore Depos. 2013, 55, 305–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Balashov, Y.A.; Bayanova, T.B.; Mitrofanov, F.P. Isotope data on the age and genesis of layered mafic-ultramafic intrusions in the Kola Peninsula and northern Karelia, northeastern Baltic Shield. Precambrian Res. 1993, 64, 197–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Zozulya, D.R.; Bayanova, T.B.; Nelson, E.G. Geology and age of the late Archaean Keivy alkaline province, NE Baltic Shield. Geology 2005, 113, 601–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Godel, B.; Barnes, S.-J.; Maier, W.-D. Platinum-group elements in sulphide minerals, platinum-group minerals, and whole-rocks of the Merensky Reef (Bushveld Complex, South Africa): Implications for the formation of the reef. J. Petrol. 2007, 48, 1569–1604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Latypov, R.M.; Chistyakova, S.Y. Mechanism for Differentiation of the Western-Pana Layered Intrusion; Publ. of KSC RAS: Apatity, Russia, 2000; Volume 315. [Google Scholar]
  20. Balabonin, N.L.; Subbotin, V.V.; Skiba, V.I.; Voitekhovsky, Y.L.; Savchenko, E.E.; Pakhomovsky, Y.A. Forms of occurrence and balance of precious metals in the Fedorovo-Pansky intrusion ores (the Kola Peninsula). Obog. Rud. 1998, 6, 24–30. [Google Scholar]
  21. Subbotin, V.V.; Korchagin, A.U.; Savchenko, E.E. Platinometal mineralization of Fedorovo-Pansky ore region: Type of ore-bearing, mineral composition, particularity of genesis. Vestn. KSC RAS 2012, 1, 55–65. [Google Scholar]
  22. Krogh, T.E. A low-contamination method for hydro-thermal dissolution of zircon and extraction of U and Pb for isotopic age determinations. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1973, 37, 485–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ludwig, K.R. PBDAT—A Computer Program for Processing Pb-U-Th Isotope Data; Version 1.22. Open-File Report 88-542; U.S. Geological Survey: Reston, VA, USA, 1991; p. 38.
  24. Ludwig, K.R. ISOPLOT/Ex—A Geochronological Toolkit for Microsoft Excel; Version 2.05; Berkeley Geochronology Center Special Publication: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1999; Volume 1a, p. 49. [Google Scholar]
  25. Stacey, J.S.; Kramers, J.D. Approximation of terrestrial lead isotope evolution by a two-stage model. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1975, 26, 207–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Steiger, R.H.; Jäger, E. Subcommission on Geochronology: Convention on the use of decay constants in geo- and cosmochronology. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1977, 36, 359–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Jacobsen, S.B.; Wasserburg, G.J. Sm-Nd isotopic evolution of chondrites and achondrites. II. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1984, 67, 137–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Goldstein, S.J.; Jacobsen, S.B. Nd and Sr isotopic systematics of river water suspended material implications for crystal evolution. Earth Plan. Sci. Lett. 1988, 87, 249–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Zhuravlyov, A.Z.; Zhuravlyov, D.Z.; Kostitsyn, Y.A.; Chernyshov, I.V. Determination of the Sm-Nd ratio for geochronological purposes. Geochemistry 1987, 8, 1115–1129. [Google Scholar]
  30. DePaolo, D.J. Neodymium isotopes in the Colorado Front Range and crust-mantle evolution in the Proterozoic. Nature 1981, 291, 193–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Liew, I.C.; Hofmann, A.W. Precambrian crustal components, plutonic associations, plate environment of the Hercinian Fold Belt of central Europe: Indications from a Nd and Sr isotopic study. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1988, 98, 129–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Van Achterbergh, E.; Ryanm, C.G.; Griffin, W.L. GLITTER: On-line interactive data reduction for the laser ablation ICP-MS microprobe. In Proceedings of the IX V.M. Goldschmidt Conference, Cambridge, MA, USA, 22–27 August 1999; Lunar and Planetary Institute Contribution No. 791: Houston, TX, USA, 1999; Volume 305. [Google Scholar]
  33. Ekimova, N.A.; Serov, P.A.; Bayanova, T.B.; Yelizarova, I.R.; Mitrofanov, F.P. The REE distribution in sulphide minerals and Sm-Nd age determination for the ore-forming processes in mafic layered intrusions. Dokl. RAS 2011, 436, 75–78. [Google Scholar]
  34. Nitkina, E.A. U-Pb zircon dating of rocks of the platiniferous Fedorova-Pana Layered Massif, Kola Peninsula. Dokl. Earth Sci. 2006, 408, 551–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Serov, P.A.; Nitkina, E.A.; Bayanova, T.B.; Mitrofanov, F.P. Comparison of the new data on dating using U-Pb and Sm-Nd isotope methods of early barren phase rocks and basal ore-hosting rocks of the Pt-bearing Fedorovo-Pansky layered intrusion (Kola peninsula). Dokl. Earth Sci. 2007, 415, 1–3. [Google Scholar]
  36. Faure, G. Principles of Isotope Geology; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1986; Volume 460. [Google Scholar]
  37. Eisele, J.; Sharma, M.; Galer, S.J.G. The role of sediment recycling in EM-1 inferred from Os, Pb, Hf, Nd, Sr isotope and trace element systematic of the Pitcairn Hotspot, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2002, 196, 197–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Hofmann, A.W. Mantle geochemistry: The message from oceanic volcanism. Nature 1997, 385, 219–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Yang, S.-H.; Hanski, E.; Li, C.; Maier, W.-D.; Huhma, H.; Mokrushin, A.V.; Latypov, R.; Lahaye, Y.; O’Brien, H.; Qu, W.-J. Mantle source of the 2.44–2.50 Ga mantle plume-related magmatism in the Fennoscandian Shield: Evidence from Os, Nd and Sr isotope compositions of the Monchepluton and Kemi intrusions. Miner. Depos. 2016, 51, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Mitrofanov, F.; Golubev, A. Russian Fennoscandian metallogeny. In Proceedings of the Abstracts of the 33 IGC, Oslo, Norway, 6–14 August 2008. [Google Scholar]
  41. Richardson, S.H.; Shirey, S.B. Continental mantle signature of Bushveld magmas and coeval diamonds. Nature 2008, 453, 910–913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Maier, W.-D.; Halkoaho, T.; Huhma, H.; Hanski, E.; Barnes, S.-J. The Penikat Intrusion, Finland: Geochemistry, geochronology, and origin of platinum-palladium reefs. J. Petrol. 2018, 59, 967–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Perttunen, V.; Vaasjoki, M. U-Pb geochronology of the Peräpohja Schist Belt, northwestern Finland. In Radiometric Age Determinations from Finnish Lapland and Their Bearing on the Timing of Precambrian Volcano-Sedimentary Sequences; Vaasjoki, M., Ed.; Special Paper 33; Geological Survey of Finland: Espoo, Finland, 2001; pp. 45–84. [Google Scholar]
  44. Mitrofanov, F.P.; Bayanova, T.B. Duration and timing of ore-bearing Palaeoproterozoic intrusions of Kola province. In Mineral Deposits: Processes to Processing; Stanley, C.J., Ed.; Balkema: Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2002; pp. 1275–1278. [Google Scholar]
  45. Amelin, Y.V.; Heaman, L.M.; Semenov, V.S. U-Pb geochronology of layered mafic intrusions in the eastern Baltic Shield: Implications for the timing and duration of Palaeoproterozoic continental rifting. Precambrian Res. 1995, 75, 31–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Kramm, U. Mantle components of carbonatites from the Kola Alkaline Province, Russia and Finland: A Nd-Sr study. Eur. J. Mineral. 1993, 5, 985–989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Heaman, L.M.; Le Cheminant, A.N. Paragenesis and U-Pb systematics of baddeleyite (ZrO). Chem. Geol. 1993, 110, 95–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Fischer-Godde, M.; Becker, H.; Wombacher, F. Rhodium, gold and other highly siderophile element abundances in chondritic meteorites. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2010, 74, 356–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Lyubetskaya, T.; Korenaga, J. Chemical composition of Earth’s primitive mantle and its variance: 2. Implications for global geodynamics. J. Geophys. Res. 2007, 112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Lyubetskaya, T.; Korenaga, J. Chemical composition of Earth’s primitive mantle and its variance: 1. Method and results. J. Geophys. Res. 2007, 112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Amelin, Y.V.; Semenov, V.S. U-Nd and Sr isotopic deochemistry of mafic layered intrusions in the eastern Baltic Shield: Implications for the evolution of Paleoproterozoic continental mafic magmas. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1996, 124, 255–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Bayanova, T.B.; Smolkin, V.F.; Levkovich, N.V. U-Pb geochronological study of Mount Generalskaya layered intrusion, northwestern Kola Peninsula, Russia. In Transactions of the Institution of Mining and Metallurgy; Institution of Mining and Metallurgy: Vladikavkaz, Russia, 1999; Volume 108, pp. B83–B90. [Google Scholar]
  53. Tolstikhin, I.N.; Dokuchaeva, V.S.; Kamensky, I.L.; Amelin, Y.V. Juvenile helium in ancient rocks: II. U-He, K-Ar, Sm-Nd, and Rb-Sr systematics in the Monchepluton. 3He/4He ratios frozen in uranium-free ultramafic rocks. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1992, 56, 987–999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Vrevsky, A.B.; Levchenkov, O.A. Geological-geochronological scale of the endogenous processes operated within the Precambrian complexes of the central part of the Kola Peninsula. In Geodynamics and Deep Structure of the Soviet Baltic Schield; Mitrofanov, F.P., Bolotov, V.I., Eds.; KSС RAS: Apatity, Russia, 1992; Volume 150. [Google Scholar]
  55. Mitrofanov, F.P.; Balagansky, V.V.; Balashov, Y.A.; Gannibal, L.F.; Dokuchaeva, V.S.; Nerovich, L.I.; Radchenko, M.K.; Ryungenen, G.I. U-Pb age for gabbro-anorthosite of the Kola Peninsula. Dokl. RAS 1993, 331, 95–98. [Google Scholar]
  56. Bayanova, T.B. Baddeleyite: A promising geochronometer for alkaline and basic magmatism. Petrology 2006, 14, 187–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Huhma, H.; Cliff, R.; Perttunen, V.; Sakko, M. Sm-Nd and Pb isotopic study of mafic rocks associated with early Proterozoic continental rifting: The Perapohja schist belt in northern Finland. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1990, 104, 369–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Alapieti, T.T.; Filen, B.A.; Lahtinen, J.J.; Lavrov, M.M.; Smolkin, V.F.; Voitekhovsky, Y.L. Early Proterozoic layered intrusions in the Northeastern part of the Fennoscandian Shield. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1990, 42, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Hanski, E.; Walker, R.J.; Huhma, H.; Suominen, I. The Os and Nd isotopic systematics of c. 2.44 Ga Akanvaara and Koitelainen mafic layered intrusions in northern Finland. Precambrian Res. 2001, 109, 73–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Bayanova, T.B.; Mitrofanov, F.P. Layered Proterozoic PGE intrusions in Kola region: New isotope data. In Proceedings of the Extended abstracts of the X International Symp. Platinum “Platinum-Group Elements—From Genesis to Beneficiation and Environmental Impact”, Oulu, Finland, 8–11 August 2005; pp. 289–291. [Google Scholar]
  61. Nerovich, L.I.; Bayanova, T.B.; Serov, P.A.; Elizarov, D.V. Magmatic sources of dikes and veins in the Moncha Tundra Massif, Baltic Shield: Isotopic-geochronologic and geochemical evidence. Geochem. Intern. 2014, 52, 548–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Rundkist, T.V.; Bayanova, T.B.; Sergeev, S.A.; Pripachkin, P.V.; Grebnev, P.A. The Paleoproterozoic Vurechuaivench layered Pt-bearing pluton, Kola Peninsula: New results of the U-Pb (ID-TIMS, SHRIMP) dating of baddeleyite and zircon. Dokl. Earth Sci. 2014, 454, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Mitrofanov, F.P.; Bayanova, T.B.; Zhirov, D.V.; Serov, P.A.; Golubev, A. Geological and isotope-geochemical characteristics of prediction and search method for the PGE-bearing mafic-ultramafic layered intrusions of the East-Scandinavian LIP. In Proceedings of the Abstracts of the XII Intern. Platinum Symp., Yekaterinburg, Russia, 11–14 August 2014; pp. 113–114. [Google Scholar]
  64. Chistyakov, A.V.; Bogatikov, O.A.; Grochovskaya, T.L.; Sharkov, E.V.; Belyatskiy, B.V.; Ovchinnikova, G.V. Burakovskiy layered pluton (S. Karelia) as a result of space combination double intrusive bodies: Petrological and isotope-geochemical data. Dokl. RAS 2000, 372, 228–235. [Google Scholar]
  65. Gorbatschev, R.; Bogdanova, S. Frontiers in the Baltic Shield. Precambrian Res. 1993, 64, 3–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Vuollo, J.I.; Huhma, H. Palaeoproterozoic mafic dikes in NE Finland. In Precambrian Geology of Finland; Lehtinen, M., Nurmi, P.A., Rämö, O.T., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2005; pp. 195–236. [Google Scholar]
  67. Vuollo, J.I.; Huhma, H.; Stepana, V.; Fedotov, G.A. Geochemistry and Sm-Nd isotope studies of a 2.45 Ga dike swarm: Hints at parental magma compositions and PGE potential to Fennoscandian layered intrusions. In Proceedings of the IX Intern. Platinum Symp., Billings, MT, USA, 21–25 July 2002; pp. 469–470. [Google Scholar]
  68. Coffin, M.F.; Eldholm, O. Large igneous provinces: Crustal structure, dimensions and external consequences. Rev. Geophys. 1994, 32, 1–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Ernst, R.E.; Buchan, K.L. Recognizing mantle plumes in the Geological Record. Earth Planet. Sci. 2003, 31, 469–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Pirajno, F. Mantle plumes, associated intraplate tectono-magmatic processes and ore systems. Episodes 2007, 30, 6–19. [Google Scholar]
  71. Tolstikhin, I.N.; Marty, B. The evolution of terrestrial volatiles: A view from helium, neon, argon and nitrogen isotope modeling. Chem. Geol. 1998, 147, 27–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Bleeker, W.; Ernst, R. Short-lived mantle generated magmatic events and their dike swarms: The key unlocking Earth’s Paleogeographic record back to 2.6 Ga. In Dike Swarms-Time Marker of Crustal Evolution; Balkema Publishers: Zürich, Switzerland, 2006; pp. 1–20. [Google Scholar]
  73. Campbell, I.H. Identification of ancient mantle plumes. In Mantle Plumes: Their Identification Through Time; Ernst, R.E., Buchan, K.L., Eds.; Geological Society of America: Boulder, CO, USA, 2001; Volume 352, pp. 5–22. [Google Scholar]
  74. Heaman, L.M. Global mafic magmatism at 2.45 Ga: Remnants of an ancient large igneous province? Geology 1997, 25, 299–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Bogatikov, O.A.; Kovalenko, V.I.; Sharkov, Y.V. Magmatism, Tectonics, and Geodynamics of the Earth; Nauka: Moscow, Russia, 2010; 606p. [Google Scholar]
  76. Grachyov, A.F. Identification of mantle plumes on the basis of studying composition and isotope geochemistry of volcanic rocks. Petrology 2003, 11, 618–654. [Google Scholar]
Minerals 09 00059 g001 550
Figure 1. Sketch map of the Palaeoproterozoic East Scandinavian LIP in the Northern Fennoscandian Shield [15].
Figure 1. Sketch map of the Palaeoproterozoic East Scandinavian LIP in the Northern Fennoscandian Shield [15].
Minerals 09 00059 g001
Minerals 09 00059 g002 550
Figure 2. Sketch geological map of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif [9].
Figure 2. Sketch geological map of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif [9].
Minerals 09 00059 g002
Minerals 09 00059 g003 550
Figure 3. (a) Isotope U-Pb concordia diagrams for magmatic zircon (2-3) and (b) zircon xenocryst (1) from gabbronorite of the Western-Pansky Block of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Figure 3. (a) Isotope U-Pb concordia diagrams for magmatic zircon (2-3) and (b) zircon xenocryst (1) from gabbronorite of the Western-Pansky Block of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Minerals 09 00059 g003
Minerals 09 00059 g004 550
Figure 4. Isotope U-Pb diagram on zircon (a) and Sm-Nd mineral isochron for rock-forming and sulfides minerals (b) from gabbronorite (LLH) of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Figure 4. Isotope U-Pb diagram on zircon (a) and Sm-Nd mineral isochron for rock-forming and sulfides minerals (b) from gabbronorite (LLH) of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Minerals 09 00059 g004
Minerals 09 00059 g005 550
Figure 5. Isotope U-Pb age (a) on baddeleyite (4-5) and zircon (1-2-3); Sm-Nd mineral isochron (b) for rock-forming minerals and WR from anorthosites in ULH of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Figure 5. Isotope U-Pb age (a) on baddeleyite (4-5) and zircon (1-2-3); Sm-Nd mineral isochron (b) for rock-forming minerals and WR from anorthosites in ULH of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Minerals 09 00059 g005
Minerals 09 00059 g006 550
Figure 6. Isotope U-Pb ages on zircon (A–C) and Sm-Nd isochrones (D–F) for rock-forming minerals from the Fedorov Block of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Figure 6. Isotope U-Pb ages on zircon (A–C) and Sm-Nd isochrones (D–F) for rock-forming minerals from the Fedorov Block of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Minerals 09 00059 g006
Minerals 09 00059 g007 550
Figure 7. Mantle normalized diagram showing the distribution of PGEs, Au, and Re in sulfides (composition of the primitive mantle is according to Reference [48]).
Figure 7. Mantle normalized diagram showing the distribution of PGEs, Au, and Re in sulfides (composition of the primitive mantle is according to Reference [48]).
Minerals 09 00059 g007
Minerals 09 00059 g008 550
Figure 8. Mantle normalized diagram showing the distribution of some trace elements in sulfides (composition of the primitive mantle is according to References [49,50]).
Figure 8. Mantle normalized diagram showing the distribution of some trace elements in sulfides (composition of the primitive mantle is according to References [49,50]).
Minerals 09 00059 g008
Minerals 09 00059 g009 550
Figure 9. Mineral Sm-Nd isochron for PGE-bearing gabbronorites (a), the U-Pb age on single zircon (b) from the Penikat intrusion and the U-Pb age on single zircon grains (c) from the Kemi intrusion (Finland), FKB.
Figure 9. Mineral Sm-Nd isochron for PGE-bearing gabbronorites (a), the U-Pb age on single zircon (b) from the Penikat intrusion and the U-Pb age on single zircon grains (c) from the Kemi intrusion (Finland), FKB.
Minerals 09 00059 g009
Minerals 09 00059 g010 550
Figure 10. Plot of εNd-ISr for the KB and FKB layered intrusions. Grey color indicates an EM-1 reservoir at the time of the layered intrusions formation. Sm-Nd and Rb-Sr isotope data are provided in Table 9.
Figure 10. Plot of εNd-ISr for the KB and FKB layered intrusions. Grey color indicates an EM-1 reservoir at the time of the layered intrusions formation. Sm-Nd and Rb-Sr isotope data are provided in Table 9.
Minerals 09 00059 g010
Minerals 09 00059 g011 550
Figure 11. Correlation for the Superior, Karelia and Hearne cratons (based on Reference [72] with amendments).
Figure 11. Correlation for the Superior, Karelia and Hearne cratons (based on Reference [72] with amendments).
Minerals 09 00059 g011
Table
Table 1. Isotope U-Pb data on baddeleyite (Bd) and zircon (Zr) on the Western-Pansky and Fedorov Blocks of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Table 1. Isotope U-Pb data on baddeleyite (Bd) and zircon (Zr) on the Western-Pansky and Fedorov Blocks of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Sample NoWeight (mg)Content (ppm)Pb Isotope Composition 1Isotope Ratios 2Age 2 (Ma)
PbU206Pb
204Pb		206Pb
207Pb		206Pb
208Pb		207Pb
235U		206Pb
238U		207Pb
206Pb
Western-Pansky Block, gabbronorites (Pan-1)
13.3095.0144117406.0913.55110.5100.46662491
21.6084.014467206.0623.55210.4730.46502491
31.9070.0142103006.1004.2209.1350.40612489
Western-Pansky Block, gabbropegmatite (P-8)
15.9095.015832405.9913.08110.4350.46812471
27.30181.028788706.1612.26010.0920.45542465
31.25125.020034006.0122.31210.0820.45322468
Western-Pansky Block, anorthosite (P-6)
10.75218.032257406.2303.26311.6820.53522438
20.10743.0133139606.191 3.1519.5880.43932438
30.20286.057729806.021 3.1928.6430.38742474
4 (bd)1.00176.0396147806.29063.6109.5480.43802435
5(bd)0.26259.056033606.13254.9509.9560.45332443
Fedorov Block, orthopyroxenite (F-3)
10.7548.060.9 8254.91911.303910.04610.442492504
20.80374.0598.645886.04591.96509.67820.431532484
30.85410.2630.245216.02811.65929.56670.425392488
41.00271.0373.125525.99161.23939.47000.424062476
Fedorov Block, olivine gabbro (F-4)
11.80725.31322.8146496.11213.817710.01320.446222484
22.00731.31382.887816.15223.55179.43060.424542467
31.95680.91374.071556.26453.69398.74010.401552433
Fedorov Block, PGE-bearing gabbronorite (F-2)
10.30498.0833.420815.95022.21119.492010.424932477
20.65513.8932.252746.15192.63719.13730.413782458
30.55583.2999.331946.11322.05288.98690.408322452
40.80622.51134.541146.11612.19148.66380.391652460
1 All ratios are corrected for blanks of 0.1 ng for Pb and 0.04 ng for U, mass discrimination 0.17 ± 0.05%. 2 Correction for common Pb has been determined for the age according to [25].
Table
Table 2. U-Pb data on single zircon xenocryst (1) and magmatic zircon (2,3) from gabbronorite of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Table 2. U-Pb data on single zircon xenocryst (1) and magmatic zircon (2,3) from gabbronorite of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
No.Weight mgContent (ppm)Isotope Composition 1Isotope Ratios and Age in Ma 2% Dis
PbU206Pb/204Pb206Pb/238U ± 2σ207Pb/235 U ± 2σ207Pb/206Pb ± 2σ206Pb/238U ± 2σ207Pb/235U ± 2σ207Pb/206Pb ± 2σ
10.045721.206.33833.590.521 ± 0.01813.327 ± 0.6340.186 ± 0.0062702 ± 952703 ± 1292704 ± 820.1
20.053612.875.92461.170.474 ± 0.01510.768 ± 0.3930.165 ± 0.0032499 ± 802503 ± 912507 ± 420.3
30.056716.1010.96111.200.472 ± 0.00810.688 ± 0.2150.164 ± 0.0022495 ± 422496 ± 502498 ± 260.1
1 Ratios are corrected for blanks of 1 pg for Pb and 10 pg for U, mass discrimination 0.12 ± 0.04%. 2 Correction for common Pb has been determined for the age according to Reference [25].
Table
Table 3. Sm-Nd data on rock-forming and sulfide minerals from gabbronorite (LLH) of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Table 3. Sm-Nd data on rock-forming and sulfide minerals from gabbronorite (LLH) of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Sample No.Content, ppmIsotope RatiosTDM, MaεNd(T)
SmNd147Sm/144Nd143Nd/144Nd
Gabbro-pegmatite LLH
WR1.0384.990.12630.511441 ± 102967−1.3
Po0.0330.1470.11440.511217 ± 69
Pn0.0110.0410.11600.511259 ± 53
Pl-10.3322.300.08530.510738 ± 24
Pl-20.3982.250.09770.510957 ± 39
Cpx + Opx-14.7516.440.17470.512209 ± 7
Cpx + Opx-22.549.340.16410.512033 ± 9
Ccp + Pn0.0220.1240.11060.511143 ± 27
Average standard values during measurements: N = 11 (La Jolla: = 0.511833 ± 10); N = 100 (JNdi1: = 0.512098 ± 15).
Table
Table 4. Sm-Nd data on whole rock and rock-forming minerals from ULH anorthosite of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Table 4. Sm-Nd data on whole rock and rock-forming minerals from ULH anorthosite of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Sample No.Content, ppmIsotope RatiosTDM, MaεNd(T)
SmNd147Sm/144Nd143Nd/144Nd
ULH anorthosite
WR0.2711.1760.13930.511613 ± 343131−0.8
Pl0.1070.7190.09010.510833 ± 39
Cpx-10.9212.940.18960.512436 ± 32
Cpx-20.8012.990.16180.511978 ± 20
Average standard values during measurements: N = 7 (La Jolla: = 0.511837 ± 8); and N = 32 (JNdi1: = 0.512097 ± 19).
Table
Table 5. Sm-Nd data on whole rock and rock-forming minerals from the Fedorov Block of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Table 5. Sm-Nd data on whole rock and rock-forming minerals from the Fedorov Block of the Fedorovo-Pansky massif.
Sample No.Content (ppm)Isotope RatiosTDM (Ga)Sm-Nd (Ma)εNd (2.5Ga)
SmNd147Sm/144Nd143Nd/144Nd
D-orthopyroxenite (F-3)
WR0.321.170.16480.512196 ± 123.052521 ± 42−1.73
Opx0.120.380.22280.513182 ± 16
Cpx2.217.670.17450.512349 ± 17
Pl0.261.620.09600.511071 ± 29
E-olivine gabbro (F-4)
WR0.632.800.13570.511548 ± 82.942516 ± 35−1.53
Opx0.230.720.19510.512555 ± 15
Cpx0.832.280.21870.512947 ± 16
Pl0.241.770.08150.510677 ± 14
F-PGE-bearing gabbronorite (F-2)
WR0.421.660.15370.511807 ± 203.182482 ± 36−2.50
Pl0.412.880.08650.510709 ± 14
Cpx1.785.730.18760.512387 ± 8
Opx0.130.330.23230.513088 ± 40
Average standard values during measurements: N = 10 (La Jolla: = 0.511835 ± 11); and N = 22 (JNdi1: = 0.512097 ± 16).
Table
Table 6. Contents (ppm) of different elements in sulfide parageneses of the Fedorovo Tundra deposit.
Table 6. Contents (ppm) of different elements in sulfide parageneses of the Fedorovo Tundra deposit.
SampleMineralNumber of Analyses CrCoAsSeRuRhPdAgCdSbReOsIrPtAuTlPbBi
237/132.0Pentlandite82.8–16.56811–106810.3–0.792–1830.5–1.00.1–6.9258–12210.4–5.8-0.1–0.1-0.10.01–0.20.01–1.20.010.1–0.80.2–8.10.02–0.2
Chalcopyrite62.80.3–1420.31780.20.1–9.1190.2–5.3140.1–0.20.020.10.30.010.03-4.5–8.0-
487/50.5Pentlandite100.9–5.983950.3–0.4990.81.5–9.14420.7-0.10.050.1–0.30.60.03–0.2-0.1–0.40.1–2.30.02
Pyrrhotite80.6–45359–156120.2–2.5102–2220.3–1.51.2–2.90.1–6360.1–1.6-0.10.03–0.090.2–0.60.6–1.10.20.010.1–1.40.1–5.80.01–0.04
Chalcopyrite5--0.5–0.7980.28.8180.450.1------1.5-
495/76.5Pentlandite102.05499–120790.41180.6–1.20.1–0.6247–14870.3–1-0.1-0.20.30.2–20.010.1–0.90.1–1.50.03–0.1
Pyrrhotite90.7–1566–119-1320.20.1–0.20.1–40.4–2-0.10.030.10.1–0.30.04–0.30.010.02–0.050.1–6.30.02–0.6
Chalcopyrite82.60.5–4870.71420.1–0.21123–1250.6–11332–9-0.04-0.020.02–0.10.020.04–0.70.6–4.10.04–0.2
Table
Table 7. U-Pb data on single zircon from layered PGE intrusions in Finland.
Table 7. U-Pb data on single zircon from layered PGE intrusions in Finland.
No.Weight mgContent (ppm)Isotope Composition 1Isotope Ratios and Age in Ma 2% Dis
PbU206Pb/204Pb206Pb/238U ± 2σ207Pb/235 U ± 2σ207Pb/206Pb ± 2σ206Pb/238U ± 2σ207Pb/235U ± 2σ207Pb/206Pb ± 2σ
Gabbronorite of Penikat
10.136024.8733.26260.120.458 ± 0.0049.929 ± 0.1380.157 ± 0.0022429 ± 212428 ± 342428 ± 24−0.04
20.184028.1442.74254.480.457 ± 0.0049.845 ± 0.1380.156 ± 0.0022426 ± 212420 ± 342416 ± 24−0.41
Gabbronorite of Kemi
10.02713.8418.52358.230.463 ± 0.00910.155 ± 0.2050.1592 ± 0.00052452 ± 492449 ± 492447 ± 7−0.2
20.05713.6119.18758.230.459 ± 0.00910.069 ± 0.2020.1592 ± 0.00052434 ± 482441 ± 492447 ± 70.5
30.03211.5116.10404.270.453 ± 0.0099.948 ± 0.1960.1592 ± 0.00052410 ± 472430 ± 482447 ± 71.3
1 Ratios are corrected for blanks of 1 pg for Pb and 10 pg for U, mass discrimination of 0.12 ± 0.04%. 2 Correction for common Pb has been determined for the age according to Reference [25].
Table
Table 8. Sm-Nd data on whole rock, rock-forming and sulfide minerals from ore-bearing gabbronorite of the Penikat layered intrusion.
Table 8. Sm-Nd data on whole rock, rock-forming and sulfide minerals from ore-bearing gabbronorite of the Penikat layered intrusion.
Content, ppmIsotope RatiosModel Age, MaεNd
SmNd147Sm/144Nd143Nd/144NdErr.CHURDM
WR2.00410.0660.149380.5118112826553155−1.4
Plagioclase0.6543.6550.076540.51063922
Clinopyroxene1.9016.3980.179560.5122859
Chalcopyrite0.1090.6470.130850.51149953
Pyrrhotite0.3012.0170.172990.51218547
Sulfide mix0.1140.7090.126480.51143146
Average standard values during measurements: N =7 (La Jolla: = 0.511836 ± 12); N = 21 (JNdi1: = 0.512097 ± 15).
Table
Table 9. Sm-Nd and Rb-Sr data on whole rock from layered Palaeoproterozoic complexes of the Fennoscandian Shield.
Table 9. Sm-Nd and Rb-Sr data on whole rock from layered Palaeoproterozoic complexes of the Fennoscandian Shield.
Sample No.Content (ppm)Isotopic RatiosεNd (2.5 Ga)TDM (Ga)87Rb/86Sr87Sr/86Sr (±2σ), 2.5 Ga
SmNd147Sm/144Nd143Nd/144Nd (±2σ)
Fedorovo-Pansky intrusion
Pan-1, gabbronorite0.7623.2930.1399800.511669 ± 7−2.002.980.001350.7032 ± 1
Pan-2, gabbronorite0.4231.6620.1537140.511807 ± 20−2.503.180.001740.7029 ± 2
F-4, olivine gabbro0.6292.8010.1356950.511548 ± 8−1.532.940.001440.7029 ± 2
F-3, orthopyroxenite0.3181.1660.1648030.512196 ± 12−1.733.050.002050.7033 ± 2
Monchetundra
MT-10, medium-grained pyroxenite0.4831.9130.1526890.511925 ± 33−0.362.810.004950.7039 ± 2
Mt. Generalskaya
S-3464, gabbronorite1.1475.3620.1293200.511449 ± 14−2.302.910.005340.7042 ± 2
Imandra lopolith
6-57, gabbronorite2.15610.9100.1191300.511380 ± 3−2.002.880.003390.7046 ± 3
Penikat
gabbronorite2.00410.0660.1493800.511810 ± 15−1.403.160.005270.7039 ± 5
Kemi
gabbronorite0.5323.1620.1349500.511821 ± 9−1.902.980.004310.7041 ± 8
Monchepluton
M-1, quartz norite1.7508.0400.1319570.511493 ± 3−1.512.910.010530.7034 ± 9
H-7, gabbronorite0.9204.1500.1340550.511537 ± 4−1.372.900.002270.7037 ± 2
Table
Table 10. U-Pb and Sm-Nd data on PGE layered intrusions of the Fennoscandian Shield.
Table 10. U-Pb and Sm-Nd data on PGE layered intrusions of the Fennoscandian Shield.
Layered IntrusionsAge (Ma)εNd(T)2 U/Pb age
U-PbSm-Nd
KB
Mt. Generalskaya
Gabbronorite2496 ± 10 1 (2505 ± 1.6) 22453 ± 42 1−2.3
Anorthosite2446 ± 10 1
Monchepluton
Dunite block, dike2505 ± 1.719
Mt. Travyanaya, norite2507 ± 9 15
Dunite block, gabbronorite dike2506 ± 10 15; 2496 ± 14 15
Nyud Terrace, gabbronorite2500±514
Nyud Terrace, gabbronorite2493±71 (2504 ± 1.5) 22492 ± 31 3−1.4
Nyud Terrace, gabbronorite2503.5 ± 4.6 19
Monchepluton, gabbronorite2498.2 ± 6.7 19
Vurechuaivench foothills, metagabbronorite2497 ± 21 15; 2498.2 ± 6.7 17
Olenegorsk deposit, quartz diorite, dike2495 ± 13 15
Main Ridge
Monchetundra, plagiopyroxenite2502.3 ± 5.9 16
Monchetundra, gabbronorite2504 ± 7.4 16
Monchetundra, gabbro2463 ± 25 4; 2453 ± 4 5
Monchetundra, gabbronorite2501 ± 8 14; 2505 ± 6 14
Monchetundra, gabbropegmatite2445.1 ± 1.7 16
Chunatundra, anorthosite2467 ± 7 15
Ostrovsky intrusion, gabbronorite-pegmatite2445 ± 11 15
Fedorovo-Pansky massif
Orthopyroxenite2526 ± 6 122521 ± 42 13−1.7
olivine gabbro2516 ± 7 122516 ± 35 13−1.4
magnetite gabbro2498 ± 5 6; 2500 ± 1016
Gabbronorite2491 ± 1.5 7 (2501 ± 1.7) 2 2500 ± 3 192487 ± 51 7−2.1
Cu-Ni PGE-bearing gabbronorite2485 ± 912; 2500 ± 3212482 ± 36 13−2.4
PGE-gabbropegmatite2470 ± 9 72467 ± 39 21−1.4
PGE-anorthosite 2447 ± 12 72442 ± 74 21−1.8
Imandra lopolith
Gabbronorite2446 ± 39 7(2441 ± 1.6) 22444 ± 77 7−2.0
gabbrodiorite-pegmatite2440 ± 4 6
Norite2437 ± 7 6
leucogabbro-anorthosite2437±11 6
Granophyre2434 ± 15 6
olivine gabbronorite (dike)2395 ± 5 6
monzodiorite dike2398 ± 21 6
FKB
Kivakka, olivine gabbronorite2445 ± 2 72439 ± 29 8−1.2
Lukkulaisvaara, pyroxenite2439 ± 117 (2442 ± 1.9)22388 ± 59 8−2.4
Tsipringa, gabbro2441 ± 1.2 22430 ± 26 8−1.1
Burakovskaya intrusion, gabbronorite2449 ± 1.1 22365 ± 90 8−2.0
Aganozero body 2372 ± 22 20−3.2
Shalozero-Burakovo Inrusive Body 2433 ± 28 20−3.1
Kovdozero intrusion, pegmatoid gabbronorite2436 ± 9 6
FINNISN GROUP
Koitelainen2433 ± 8 92437 ± 49 11−2.0
Koilismaa2436 ± 5 10
Nyaryankavaara2440 ± 16 10
Penikat2430 ± 2 212410 ± 64 9; 2426 ± 38 18−1.6; −1.4
Akanvaara2437 ± 7 112423 ± 49 11−2.1
Kemi2446.8 ± 3.6 21
1 [52]5 [55]9 [57]13 [35]17 [62]21 Present study
2 [45]6 [56]10 [58]14 [60]18 [33]
3 [53]7 [16]11 [59]15 [12]19 [63]
4 [54]8 [56]12 [34]16 [61]20 [64]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bayanova, T.; Korchagin, A.; Mitrofanov, A.; Serov, P.; Ekimova, N.; Nitkina, E.; Kamensky, I.; Elizarov, D.; Huber, M. Long-Lived Mantle Plume and Polyphase Evolution of Palaeoproterozoic PGE Intrusions in the Fennoscandian Shield. Minerals 2019, 9, 59. https://doi.org/10.3390/min9010059

AMA Style

Bayanova T, Korchagin A, Mitrofanov A, Serov P, Ekimova N, Nitkina E, Kamensky I, Elizarov D, Huber M. Long-Lived Mantle Plume and Polyphase Evolution of Palaeoproterozoic PGE Intrusions in the Fennoscandian Shield. Minerals. 2019; 9(1):59. https://doi.org/10.3390/min9010059

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bayanova, Tamara, Aleksey Korchagin, Alexander Mitrofanov, Pavel Serov, Nadezhda Ekimova, Elena Nitkina, Igor Kamensky, Dmitry Elizarov, and Milosh Huber. 2019. "Long-Lived Mantle Plume and Polyphase Evolution of Palaeoproterozoic PGE Intrusions in the Fennoscandian Shield" Minerals 9, no. 1: 59. https://doi.org/10.3390/min9010059

APA Style

Bayanova, T., Korchagin, A., Mitrofanov, A., Serov, P., Ekimova, N., Nitkina, E., Kamensky, I., Elizarov, D., & Huber, M. (2019). Long-Lived Mantle Plume and Polyphase Evolution of Palaeoproterozoic PGE Intrusions in the Fennoscandian Shield. Minerals, 9(1), 59. https://doi.org/10.3390/min9010059

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