Auxiliary Material for:
The capacity of hydrous fluids to transport and fractionate incompatible elements and metals
within the Earth’s mantle
By John Adam1,2*, Marek Locmelis2, Juan Carlos Afonso1, Tracy Rushmer1 and Marco L.
Fiorentini2
1
Department of Earth & Planetary Sciences, Macquarie University, N.S.W. 2109, Australia
2
CCFS Centre for Exploration Targeting, School of Earth and Environment, The University of
Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, W.A. 6009, Australia
Keywords: aqueous fluids, nepheline basanite, peridotite, mantle lithosphere, arc volcanism,
kimberlites, lamproites, metals
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +61 (02) 98504405; Email address: john.adam@mq.edu.au (John
Adam)
Introduction
This data set contains both analytical results and photographic images. The analytical results are
from LAM-ICP-MS analyses of trace and minor element concentrations in run products, the
experimental starting glass (UT-70489), and the USGS standard BCR-2 (which was analysed at
regular intervals as an unknown during analyses of run products). These data were used to calculate
the fluid/melt and fluid/mineral D values presented in Table 3 and Figs. 3-6 of the main text, as well
as to check on the accuracy of results. The photos are back-scattered electron images which show
the distributions and textural characteristics of run products in capsules at the finish of experiments.
The images have been selected to illustrate the effects of varying pressure (from 1.0 to 4.0 GPa) on
run products and the mutual solubilities of hydrous fluids and melts. Both the LAM-ICP-MS
analyses and back-scattered electron images were obtained during the course of this study using
instrumentation at the GEMOC Analytical Facility of Macquarie University, Australia (see main
text). The analytical data are presented as two tables in one file (-ts1to2.pdf). The photographic
images are contained in a second file which has twelve figures (-fs1to12.wds).
Figures
fs01.pdf (Figure 1) BSE image of Run R111 in longitudinal section
fs02.pdf (Figure 2) close up BSE image of Run R111 showing precipitated fluidsolute and co-existing crystals
fs03.pdf (Figure 3) BSE image of Run 2001in longitudinal section
fs04.pdf (Figure 4) BSE image of Run 2001showing co-existing quenched melt and
precipitated fluid solute
fs05.pdf (Figure 5) BSE image of Run 2001 showing quenched basanite melt and coexisting olivine crystal in capsule tail
fs06.pdf (Figure 6) BSE image of Run 2001 showing a close up image of precipitated
fluid-solute and co-existing basanite melt
fs07.pdf (Figure 7) BSE image of Run 2013 in longitudinal section
fs08.pdf (Figure 8) BSE image of Run 2013 showing the interface between quenched
basanite melt and precipitated solutes from co-existing aqueous fluid
fs09.pdf (Figure 9) BSE image of Run 2013 showing spherules of quenched basanite
melt and precipitated solutes from co-existing aqueous fluid
fs10.pdf (Figure 10) BSE image of Run R122 showing quenched aqueous fluid phase
(after quenching) near top of capsule
fs11.pdf (Figure 11) BSE image of Run R122 showing capsule tail with quenched
basanite melt and co-existing crystal of olivine
fs12.pdf BSE image of Run R125 showing single hyper-solvus fluid phase
1. txt.01 (Table 1) Element concentrations determined by LAM-ICP-MS analyses of the
experimental starting glass (UT-70489) and the USGS standard BCR-2. Preferred values
from GeoRem are also given for BCR-2.
2.1 Column “Element”, list of analysed element with prefixes indicating particular isotopes
analysed by ICP-MS system
2.2 Column “Trace element enriched basanite glass (UT-70489) used in experiments”, average
of 4 analyses
2.3 Column “1 sigma”, 1 standard deviation for 4 analyses of basanite glass UT-70489
2.4 Column “USGS BCR-2” average of 8 analyses
2.5 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 8 analyses of glass of USGS BCR-2
2.6 Column “USGS BCR-2” GeoReM preferred values for USGS standard BCR-2
2. txt.02 (Table 2) Element concentrations in run products analysed by LAM-ICP-MS
2.1 Column “R111 amph average” average of 5 amphibole analyses for Run R111
2.2 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 5 analyses of amphibole from Run R111
2.3 Column “R111 cpx average” average of 4 clinopyroxene analyses for Run R111
2.4 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 4 analyses of clinopyroxene from Run R111
2.5 Column “R111 opx average” average of 3 orthopyroxene analyses for Run R111
2.6 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 3 analyses of orthopyroxene from Run R111
2.7 Column “olivine average” average of 2 olivine analyses for Run R111
2.8 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 2 analyses of olivine from Run R111
2.9 Column “R111 mica average” average of 3 mica analyses for Run R111
2.10 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 3 analyses of mica from Run R111
2.11 Column “run 2001 melt average” average of 5 quenched melt analyses for Run 2001
2.12 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 5 analyses of quenched melt from Run 2001
2.13 Column “run 2001 solute average” average of 5 solute analyses for Run 2001
2.14 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 5 analyses of solute from Run 2001
2.15 Column “run 2003 average solute” average of 4 solute analyses for Run 2003
2.16 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 4 analyses of solute from Run 2003
2.17 Column “run 2003 average melt” average of 4 quenched melt analyses for Run 2003
2.18 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 4 analyses of quenched melt from Run 2003
2.19 Column “run 2006 average solute” average of 4 solute analyses for Run 2006
2.20 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 4 analyses of solute from Run 2006
2.21 Column “run 2006 average melt” average of 5 analyses of quenched melt from Run 2006
2.22 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 5 analyses of quenched melt from Run 2006
2.23 Column “run 2013 average solute” average of 6 solute analyses for Run 2013
2.24 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 6 analyses of solute from Run 2013
2.25 Column “run 2013 average melt” average of 4 quenched melt analyses for Run 2013
2.26 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 4 analyses of quenched melt from Run 2013
2.27 Column “run 2014 average melt” average of 4 quenched melt analyses for Run 2014
2.28 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 4 analyses of quenched melt from Run 2014
2.29 Column “run 2014 average solute” average of 6 solute analyses for Run 2014
2.30 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 6 analyses of solute from Run 2014
2.31 Column “run R122 average solute” average of 5 solute analyses for Run R122
2.32 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 5 analyses of solute from Run R122
2.33 Column “run R122 average melt” average of 5 quenched melt analyses for Run R122
2.34 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 5 analyses of quenched melt from Run R122
2.35 Column “run 1627 average solute” average of 4 solute analyses for Run 1627
2.36 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 4 analyses of solute from Run 1627
2.37 Column “run 1627 average melt” average of 4 quenched melt analyses for Run 1627
2.38 Column “1 sigma” 1 standard deviation for 4 analyses of quenched melt from Run 1627