Hannah S. R. Hughes

The six platinum group elements (PGE) are among the rarest elements in the upper continental crust of the earth. Higher values of PGE have been detected in the upper mantle and in chondrite meteorites. The PGE are siderophile and chalcophile elements and are divided into the following: (1) the Ir subgroup (IPGE) = Os, Ir, and Ru and (2) the Pd subgroup (PPGE) = Rh, Pt, and Pd. The IPGE are more refractory and less chalcophile than the PPGE. High concentrations of PGE led, in rare cases, to the formation of mineral deposits. The PGE are carried in discrete phases, the platinum group minerals (PGM), and are included as trace elements into the structure of base metal sulphides (BM), such as pentlandite, chalcopyrite, pyrite, and pyrrhotite. Similarly to PGE, the PGM are also divided into two main groups, i.e., IPGM composed of Os, Ir, and Ru and PPGM containing Rh, Pt, and Pd. The PGM occur both in mafic and ultramafic rocks and are mainly hosted in stratiform reefs, sulphide-rich lenses, and placer deposits. Presently, there are only 169 valid PGM that represent about 2.7% of all 6176 minerals discovered so far. However, 496 PGM are listed among the valid species that have not yet been officially accepted, while a further 641 are considered as invalid or discredited species. The main reason for the incomplete characterization of PGM resides in their mode of occurrence, i.e., as grains in composite aggregates of a few microns in size, which makes it difficult to determine their crystallography. Among the PGM officially accepted by the IMA, only 13 (8%) were discovered before 1958, the year when the IMA was established. The highest number of PGM was discovered between 1970 and 1979, and 99 PGM have been accepted from 1980 until now. Of the 169 PGM accepted by the IMA, 44% are named in honour of a person, typically a scientist or geologist, and 31% are named after their discovery localities. The nomenclature of 25% of the PGM is based on their chemical composition and/or their physical properties. PGM have been discovered in 25 countries throughout the world, with 64 from Russia, 17 from Canada and South Africa (each), 15 from China, 12 from the USA, 8 from Brazil, 6 from Japan, 5 from Congo, 3 from Finland and Germany (each), 2 from the Dominican Republic, Greenland, Malaysia, and Papua New Guinea each, and only 1 from Argentine, Australia, Bulgaria, Colombia, Czech Republic, England, Ethiopia, Guyana, Mexico, Serbia, and Tanzania each. Most PGM phases contain Pd (82 phases, 48% of all accepted PGM), followed, in decreasing order of abundances, by those of Pt 35 phases (21%), Rh 23 phases (14%), Ir 18 phases (11%), Ru 7 phases (4%), and Os 4 phases (2%). The six PGE forming the PGM are bonded to other elements such as Fe, Ni, Cu, S, As, Te, Bi, Sb, Se, Sn, Hg, Ag, Zn, Si, Pb, Ge, In, Mo, and O. Thirty-two percent of the 169 valid PGM crystallize in the cubic system, 17% are orthorhombic, 16% hexagonal, 14% tetragonal, 11% trigonal, 3% monoclinic, and only 1% triclinic. Some PGM are members of a solid-solution series, which may be complete or contain a miscibility gap, providing information concerning the chemical and physical environment in which the mineral was formed. The refractory IPGM precipitate principally in primitive, high-temperature, mantle-hosted rocks such as podiform and layered chromitites. Being more chalcophile, PPGE are preferentially collected and concentrated in an immiscible sulphide liquid, and, under appropriate conditions, the PPGM can precipitate in a thermal range of about 900–300 °C in the presence of fluids and a progressive increase of oxygen fugacity (fO₂). Thus, a great number of Pt and Pd minerals have been described in Ni-Cu sulphide deposits. Two main genetic models have been proposed for the formation of PGM nuggets: (1) Detrital PGM represent magmatic grains that were mechanically liberated from their primary source by weathering and erosion with or without minor alteration processes, and (2) PGM reprecipitated in the supergene environment through a complex process that comprises solubility, the leaching of PGE from the primary PGM, and variation in Eh-pH and microbial activity. These two models do not exclude each other, and alluvial deposits may contain contributions from both processes.

The geodynamic regime(s) that predominated during the Archean remains controversial, with the plethora of competing models largely informed by the felsic lithologies. Ultramafic–mafic rocks displaying distinctive geochemical signatures are formed in a range of Phanerozoic geotectonic environments. These rocks have high melting points, making them potentially useful tools for investigating Archean geodynamic processes in highly metamorphosed regions. We present the results of field mapping, petrography, traditional bulk-rock geochemistry and platinum group element geochemistry for 12 ultramafic–mafic bodies in the Lewisian Gneiss Complex, which is a highly metamorphosed fragment of the North Atlantic Craton in NW Scotland. Our data indicate that most of these occurrences are layered intrusions emplaced into the tonalite–trondhjemite–granodiorite-dominated crust prior to polyphase metamorphism, representing a significant re-evaluation of the magmatic evolution of the Lewisian Gneiss Complex. Of the other occurrences, two remain ambiguous, but one (Loch an Daimh Mor) has some geochemical affinity with abyssal/orogenic peridotites and may represent a fragment of Archean mantle, although further investigation is required. The ultramafic–mafic bodies in the Lewisian Gneiss Complex thus represent more than one type of event/process. Compared with the tonalite–trondhjemite–granodiorite host rocks, these lithologies may preserve evidence of protolith origin(s), with potential to illuminate the tectonic setting(s) and geodynamic regimes of the early Earth. Supplementary material: Bulk rock geochemical data is available at: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.4878588

The relative depletion of high field strength elements (HFSE), such as Nb, Ta and Ti, on normalised trace-element plots is a geochemical proxy routinely used to fingerprint magmatic processes linked to Phanerozoic subduction. This proxy has increasingly been applied to ultramafic-mafic units in Archaean cratons, but as these assemblages have commonly been affected by high-grade metamorphism and hydrothermal alteration/metasomatism, the likelihood of element mobility is high relative to Phanerozoic examples. To assess the validity of HFSE anomalies as a reliable proxy for Archaean subduction, we here investigate their origin in ultramafic rocks from the Ben Strome Complex, which is a 7 km² ultramafic-mafic complex in the Lewisian Gneiss Complex of NW Scotland. Recently interpreted as a deformed layered intrusion, the Ben Strome Complex has been subject to multiple phases of high-grade metamorphism, including separate granulite- and amphibolite-facies deformation events. Additional to bulk-rock geochemistry, we present detailed petrography, and major- and trace-element mineral chemistry for 35 ultramafic samples, of which 15 display negative HFSE anomalies. Our data indicate that the magnitude of HFSE anomalies in the Ben Strome Complex are correlated with light rare earth-element (LREE) enrichment likely generated during interaction with H₂O and CO₂-rich hydrothermal fluids associated with amphibolitisation, rather than primary magmatic (subduction-related) processes. Consequently, we consider bulk-rock HFSE anomalies alone to be an unreliable proxy for Archaean subduction in Archaean terranes that have experienced multiple phases of high-grade metamorphism, with a comprehensive assessment of element mobility and petrography a minimum requirement prior to assigning geodynamic interpretations to bulk-rock geochemical data.

In Southern Africa, the geodynamic setting and source(s) of magmas that fed the Bushveld Complex remain unresolved – not least the controls on the metallogenic signature of this large igneous provi...