4.7 Article

Equilibrium nickel isotope fractionation in nickel sulfide minerals

Journal

GEOCHIMICA ET COSMOCHIMICA ACTA
Volume 222, Issue -, Pages 1-16

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.gca.2017.10.018

Keywords

Ni isotopes; Equilibrium isotope fractionation; Sulfides; Density functional theory

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41604071, 41530315]
  2. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences and Institutes [Y552013Y00]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Nickel is an important element on Earth, and a major element in the Earth's core, and plays important roles in many geological and biological systems. As an important sink of Ni, Ni sulfides are closely concerned with Ni migration in magma systems and the genesis and evolution of magmatic sulfide deposits. Ni isotopes of Ni sulfides may be a powerful geochemical tracer in magmatic processes and evolution of magmatic sulfide deposits. However Ni isotope fractionation factors of sulfides remain poorly known, which makes the applications of Ni isotopes to geological problems associated with sulfides difficult. In this study, the first-principles methods are used to compute Ni isotope fractionation parameters of polydymite (Ni3S4), heazlewoodite (Ni3S2), millerite (NiS), godlevskite (Ni9S8) and vaesite (NiS2). The reduced partition function ratios of Ni-60/(58) Ni (10(3) ln beta(60-58)) for these minerals decrease in the order of polydymite > heazlewoodite > millerite > godlevskite > vaesite. Ni isotope fractionations in these Ni sulfides show an approximately linear dependence on the average Ni-S bond lengths, and have a significant negative correlation with the average Ni-Ni bond lengths. Furthermore, a change in Fe/Ni ratio can also lead to Ni isotope fractionation, and with substitution Fe for Ni, the reduced partition function ratios of Ni-60/(58) Ni decrease. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available