Protogenetic sulfide inclusions in diamonds date the diamond formation event using Re-Os isotopes

M. G. Pamato*, D. Novella, D. E. Jacob, B. Oliveira, D. G. Pearson, S. Greene, J. C. Afonso, M. Favero, T. Stachel, M. Alvaro, F. Nestola

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    12 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Sulfides are the most abundant inclusions in diamonds and a key tool for dating diamond formation via Re-Os isotopic analyses. The manner in which fluids invade the continental lithospheric mantle and the time scale at which they equilibrate with preexisting (protogenetic) sulfides are poorly understood yet essential factors to understanding diamond formation and the validity of isotopic ages. We investigated a suite of sulfide-bearing diamonds from two Canadian cratons to test the robustness of Re-Os in sulfide for dating diamond formation. Single-crystal X-ray diffraction (XRD) allowed determination of the original monosulfide solid-solution (Mss) composition stable in the mantle, indicating subsolidus conditions of encapsulation, and providing crystallographic evidence supporting a protogenetic origin of the inclusions. The results, coupled with a diffusion model, indicate Re-Os isotope equilibration is sufficiently fast in sulfide inclusions with typical grain size, at mantle temperatures, for the system to be reset by the diamond-forming event. This confirms that even if protogenetic, the Re-Os isochrons defined by these minerals likely reflect the ages of diamond formation, and this result highlights the power of this system to date the timing of fluid migration in mantle lithosphere.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)941-945
    Number of pages5
    JournalGeology
    Volume49
    Issue number8
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2021

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Protogenetic sulfide inclusions in diamonds date the diamond formation event using Re-Os isotopes'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this