Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T19:18:27.641Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Mineralogy, geochemistry and emplacement of the Conakry Igneous Complex, Guinea: implications for the Ni–Cu–PGE mineralization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 April 2018

Thierry Augé
Affiliation:
Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Minières (BRGM), BP 36009, 45060 Orléans cedex 2, France
Éric Gloaguen*
Affiliation:
Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Minières (BRGM), BP 36009, 45060 Orléans cedex 2, France
Matthieu Chevillard
Affiliation:
Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Minières (BRGM), BP 36009, 45060 Orléans cedex 2, France
Laurent Bailly
Affiliation:
Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Minières (BRGM), BP 36009, 45060 Orléans cedex 2, France
*
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Conakry Igneous Complex is a mafic-ultramafic intrusion emplaced contemporaneously with the opening of the Atlantic, forming a complex, 55 km x 5 km dyke-like body within which three main episodes of injection have been recognized, characterized by a lack of mineral layering. Unit 1 consists of dunite and related facies, Unit 2 of wehrlite and pyroxene peridotite and Unit 3 corresponds to various gabbro facies. Units 1 and 2 constitute the Kaloum Peninsula; Unit 3 is its NW extension, forming the 1010 m high Mount Kakoulima. Unit 3 intrudes the two previous units and corresponds to a tholeiitic liquid that crystallized in an almost closed system, and thus exhibits a strong differentiation trend, in contrast to Units 1 and 2. Mineral compositions suggest the existence of a deeper magma chamber where a first stage of differentiation occurred.

Disseminated base-metal sulfides (BMS) are present in all units of the complex and earlier descriptions have mentioned a “massive sulfide layer” with 2 to 4 g/t PGE. Platinum-group minerals (PGM) are almost everywhere included in or attached to composite Ni–Fe–Cu sulfides. Most PGM grains form complex associations resulting either from exsolution or alteration. It is characteristic of the Conakry Igneous Complex PGM, described here for the first time, to be dominated by (Pd,Pt)(Te,Bi) minerals with rare Pd,Sn and Pd,Pb compositions and an absence of Pt,Pd sulfides and Pt,Pd antimonides.

The constant association of the PGM with the BMS shows that the magmatic sulfide liquid acts as an efficient collector of PGE. In such a dynamic environment, the process leading to the formation of massive sulfides must be sought in the accumulation of sulfides in the conduit following host-rock assimilation. Accordingly, considering the multiple injection processes that characterize the whole intrusion, the potential for discovering additional Ni–Cu–PGE mineralization in the Conakry Igneous Complex remains high.

Information

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 2018 
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Location, simplified geologic map and cross-section of the Conakry Igneous Complex. (a) Location of the Conakry Igneous Complex in the western part of Guinea (red rectangle) and the Freetown Complex in the western part of Sierra Leone (FC, blue rectangle). (b and c) Simplified geological map of the Conakry Igneous Complex from field data. Geological mapping of Forecariah group and basement are taken from Villeneuve et al. (2015). (d) NW–SE cross-section of the Conakry Igneous Complex with position of drillholes constraining Conakry Igneous Complex contacts with host rocks.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Photographs of selected outcrops on the Conakry Igneous Complex. (a) weathering profile in the ultramafic unit showing the low-angle fracture cleavage. (b) Gabbro dyke cutting the ultramafic unit in the weathering profile. (c) Pegmatoid leucogabbro. (d) Low-angle fractures within wehrlite. (e) Fracture system in wehrlite, Unit 2. Next page: (f) Clinopyroxenite veinlet in wehrlite from Unit 2. (g) Large clinopyroxene crystals in wehrlite, Unit 2. (h) Fragment of a clinopyroxenite layer in gabbro. (i) Enclave of fine-grained gabbro in coarse-grained gabbro norite (Unit 3).

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Photomicrographs of various rock types of the Conakry Igneous Complex (left: plane-polarized light, right: cross-polarized light). (a, b) Dunite, typical fracturing with local development of carbonate veinlets. Sample KK67, Unit 1. (c, d) Clinopyroxene dunite, showing euhedral olivine and chromite and interstitial clinopyroxenes. Sample KK7, Unit 1. (e, f) Plagioclase wehrlite showing euhedral olivine and clinopyroxene and interstitial plagioclase. Sample KK58, Unit 2. (g, h) Plagioclase wehrlite displaying a complex texture, with tiny euhedral olivine partly included in large clinopyroxene. Sample KK4, Unit 2.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Photomicrographs of various rock types of the Conakry Igneous Complex (left: plane-polarized light, right: cross-polarized light). (a, b) Plagioclase wehrlite, showing euhedral olivine, pyroxenes and chromite and interstitial plagioclase. Sample KK22, Unit 2. (c, d) BMS-bearing plagioclase wehrlite, showing an orthopyroxene lath and a sulfide droplet. Sample KK95-2, Unit 2. (e, f) Coarse-grained gabbro norite. Sample KK46, Unit 3. (g, h) Fine-grained gabbro showing plagioclase laths. Sample KK88, Unit 3.

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Plot of (a) NiO in wt. percent vs. Mg/(Mg + Fe) in molar percent in olivine and (b) distribution of Mg/(Mg + Fe) in molar percent between olivine and clinopyroxene from the three units of the Conakry Igneous Complex.

Figure 5

Fig. 6. Plot of (a) Cr2O3 in wt. percent vs. Mg/(Mg + Fe) in molar percent and (b) vs. Al2O3 in wt. percent in clinopyroxene from the three units of the Conakry Igneous Complex. For Unit 3, olivine-bearing gabbros are distinguished in (a).

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Plot of (a) Cr2O3 in wt. percent vs. Mg/(Mg + Fe) in molar percent and (b) vs. Al2O3 in wt.% in orthopyroxene from Units 2 and 3 of the Conakry Igneous Complex.

Figure 7

Fig. 8. Composition of disseminated chromian spinel in the Al–Cr–Fe3+ diagram for the three units of the Conakry Igneous Complex.

Figure 8

Fig. 9. Plots of (a) Cr/(Cr + Al + Fe3+) in molar percent vs. Mg/(Mg + Fe2+) in molar percent and (b) TiO2 in wt. percent vs. Fe3+/(Fe3++Al+Cr) in molar percent in chromian spinel from the three units of the Conakry Igneous Complex.

Figure 9

Table 1. Major- and trace-element compositions of selected samples from the three units of the Conakry Igneous Complex.

Figure 10

Fig. 10. MgO vs. selected major, minor and trace elements in the three units of the Conakry Igneous Complex. The star in the MgO–Ni binary diagram corresponds to the average olivine composition in Unit 1. Key as in Fig. 9.

Figure 11

Fig. 11. (a) MgO vs. Zr and (b) Zr versus total REE content in the three units of the Conakry Igneous Complex. Key as in Fig. 9.

Figure 12

Fig. 12. Chondrite-normalized REE diagrams for selected samples of the three units of the Conakry Igneous Complex. Chondrite values are from McDonough and Sun (1995).

Figure 13

Fig. 13. Pt–Pd correlation diagram for selected samples of the three units of the Conakry Igneous Complex. Key as in Fig. 9.

Figure 14

Fig. 14. Back-scattered scanning electron microscope images showing the PGM and their host minerals (BSE mode). Analysis numbers refer to Table 2. (a) Large chalcopyrite grain containing small blebs of PdSn minerals (in black squares). Sample KK22. (b) Detail of (a) showing a cluster of anhedral paolovite (Anal. 44). (c) Large euhedral clinopyroxene with BMS inclusions in cleavage. Sample KK63. (d) Detail of (c) (square A) showing a pentlandite grain containing a laurite inclusion (in square). (e) Detail of (c) (square B) showing a pentlandite grain containing an undetermined (Pd,Pt)(Te,Bi) inclusion (arrow). (f) Lath of an undetermined PtTe mineral in pentlandite. Sample KK94. (g) Lath of an undetermined PtPdTe mineral in pentlandite and silicate. Sample KK94. (h) Lath of an undetermined PtTe mineral in pentlandite and silicate. Sample KK100.

Figure 15

Fig. 15. (a) Two-phase grain (michenerite with variable Te/Bi ratios) included in pyrrhotite. Sample KK94 (Anal. 37, grey area). (b) Complex grain of moncheite (white) and an apparently altered mineral of a composition close to michenerite. Sample KK 94 (Anal. 35, white area). (c) Michenerite partly included in pyrrhotite. Sample KK94 (Anal. 42). (d) Apparently altered undetermined PdBiTe grain in a fractured assemblage of BMS. Sample KK94. (e) BMS enriched in PGM. Sample KK95-2. (f) Detail of image (e) (rectangle A) showing a large undetermined (Pd,Pb)Te grain (Anal. 20). (g) Detail of image (e) (rectangle B) showing an undetermined (Pd,Pb)Te grain (Anal. 21). (h) Small PGM located at the periphery of BMS grain. Sample KK95-2.

Figure 16

Table 2. Selected compositions from electron microprobe analyses of platinum-group minerals from the Conakry Igneous Complex.

Figure 17

Fig. 16. (a) BMS enriched in PGM (white spots). Sample KK 95-2. (b) Large paolovite at the contact between chalcopyrite and silicate. Sample KK95-2 (Anal. 22). (c) Large moncheite (apparently locally altered) in pentlandite. Sample KK 95-2 (Anal. 25). (d) Plumbopalladinite grains in fractured BMS. Sample KK 95-2 (Anals.29, 30). (e) Complex grain of kotulskite composition in fractured pentlandite. Sample KK 99 (Anal. 3). (f) Complex PGM grain of michenerite and moncheite association included in pyrrhotite. Sample KK 100 (Anal. 50, grey zone, michenerite, Anal.49, moncheite). (g) Complex grain of michenerite composition in a fractured pyrrhotite. Sample KK 100 (Anal. 53). (h) Small laurite included in a euhedral chromite crystal obtained by panning (Anal. 55).

Supplementary material: File

Augé et al. supplementary material

Augé et al. supplementary material 1

Download Augé et al. supplementary material(File)
File 92.5 KB