Michael Baker

Mining and exploration companies routinely use four-acid digestion (4AD), inductively coupled plasma, atomic emission spectra/mass spectrometry methods from commercial assay laboratories for analysing drill and rock samples for lithogeochemical assessment and resource reporting. This method is also known to exhibit lower recovery of elements hosted by resistate minerals. To assess the impact of lower recoveries on lithogeochemical interpretation, a suite of commonly used elements for lithogeochemical analysis (high-field-strength elements Zr, Hf, Nb, Ta, Ti and Eu and transition elements V and Sc) was analysed by 4AD and alkali fusion/acid digestion (AFAD). Lower recoveries in the 4AD relative to the AFAD were recorded for Zr, Hf, Nb, Ta, Ti and Eu; Sc and V reported similar concentrations for both decomposition methods. Despite the lower recoveries for Nb, Ta and Ti, element ratios were largely preserved with the 4AD method due to the recoveries covarying at a 1:1 ratio. A plot of Ti/Nb against V/Sc was found to be largely unaffected by decomposition method, producing similar compositional classifications between the two digestion methods. Use of the Eu anomaly (Eu/Eu*) to determine plagioclase fractionation was also found to be unaffected by decomposition method. In contrast, a standard Zr/Ti v. Nb/Y discrimination plot produced incorrect classifications with 4AD producing more mafic and alkaline classifications relative to the AFAD method. Magmatic fertility interpretations utilizing Zr/Hf were also found to be affected in the 4AD results due to the lower recovery of Zr relative to Hf. This resulted in a bias in the 4AD results and produced false-positive anomalism in fertility assessments. Multiple decomposition methods including combinations of acid and fusion methods are recommended for lithogeochemical analysis utilizing large regions of the periodic table. However, if only 4AD data are available, plots such as Ti/Nb v. V/Sc and Nb/Ta, which preserve their ratios, can be used for lithogeochemical classification. Supplementary material: Wholerock geochemical data and detailed methods are available at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.6444444