Reevaluation of the K/Rb-Li Systematics in Muscovite as a Potential Exploration Tool for Identifying Li Mineralization in Granitic Pegmatites

Michael A. Wise,Adam C. Curry,Russell S. Harmon
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/min14010117
IF: 2.5
2024-01-23
Minerals
Abstract:A dataset of >1190 published compositional analyses of muscovite from granitic pegmatites of varying mineralogical types was compiled to reevaluate the usefulness of K-Rb-Li systematics of muscovite as a tool for distinguishing mineralogically simple pegmatites from pegmatites with potential Li mineralization. Muscovite from (i) common, (ii) (Be-Nb-Ta-P)-enriched, (iii) Li-enriched, and (iv) REE- to F-enriched pegmatites contain Li contents that vary between 10 and 20,000 ppm depending on the degree of pegmatite fractionation. Common pegmatites are characterized by low degrees of fractionation as exhibited by K/Rb ratios ranging from 618 and 25 and Li contents generally being 1700 ppm. Muscovite from moderately to highly fractionated Li-rich pegmatites exhibit a wide range of K/Rb ratios and Li values: (i) K/Rb = 84 to 1.4 and Li = 35 to >18,100 ppm for spodumene pegmatites, (ii) K/Rb = 139 to 2 and Li = 139 to >18,500 ppm for petalite pegmatites, and (iii) K/Rb = 55 to 1.5 and Li = 743 to >17,800 ppm for lepidolite pegmatites. Pegmatites that host substantial REE- and F-rich minerals may carry muscovite with K/Rb ratios between 691 to 4 that has Li contents between 19 to 15,690 ppm. The K/Rb-Li behavior of muscovite can be useful in assessing the potential for Li mineralization in certain granitic pegmatite types. The proposed limits of K/Rb values and Li concentrations for identifying spodumene- or petalite-bearing pegmatites as part of an exploration program is reliable for Group 1 (LCT) pegmatite populations derived from S-type parental granites or anatectic melting of peraluminous metasedimentary rocks. However, it is not recommended for application to Group 2 (NYF) pegmatites affiliated with anorogenic to post-orogenic granitoids with A-type geochemical signatures or that derived by the anatexis of mafic rocks that generated REE- and F-rich melts.
geochemistry & geophysics,mineralogy,mining & mineral processing
What problem does this paper attempt to address?