by | Mar 13, 2019 | vol10 | 0 comments

<< Previous article

Corrigendum to “Plume-lithosphere interaction, and the formation of fibrous diamonds” by Broadley et al., 2018

M.W. Broadley1,2,

1Geochemical Research Center, Graduate School of Science, The University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan
2Centre de Recherches Pétrographiques et Géochimiques, 54501 Vandoeuvre-Lès-Nancy Cedex, France

H. Kagi1,

1Geochemical Research Center, Graduate School of Science, The University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan

R. Burgess3,

3School of Earth and Environmental Science, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK

D. Zedgenisov4,5,

4Sobolev Institute of Geology and Mineralogy, SB RAS, Koptyuga ave. 3, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
5Novosibirsk State University, Pirogova st. 1, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia

S. Mikhail6,

6The School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, UK

M. Almayrac2,

2Centre de Recherches Pétrographiques et Géochimiques, 54501 Vandoeuvre-Lès-Nancy Cedex, France

A. Ragozin4,5,

4Sobolev Institute of Geology and Mineralogy, SB RAS, Koptyuga ave. 3, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
5Novosibirsk State University, Pirogova st. 1, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia

A. Pomazansky7,

7NIGP (Geo-Scientific research Enterprise) ALROSA Co., Chernyshevskoe rd. 7, 678170, Mirny, Sakha Republic, Russia

H. Sumino8

8Department of Basic Science, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 153-8902, Japan

Affiliations  |  Corresponding Author  |  Cite as  |  Funding information

Geochemical Perspectives Letters 10  |  doi: 10.7185/geochemlet.1825cor
Received 4 March 2019  |  Accepted 6 March 2019  |  Published 13 March 2019

Copyright © The Authors

Published by the European Association of Geochemistry
under Creative Commons License CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

 
top

Corrigendum

Corrigendum | Original article

Correction to: Geochemical Perspectives Letters 8, 26–30, doi: 10.7185/geochemlet.1825cor, published on 1 October 2018.

The authors regret that several typographic errors were included within Table S-2 in the Supplementary Information. This resulted in some of the concentrations being reported to the wrong order of magnitude. Furthermore, in Figure 2 there were one too many NBRS samples plotted, whilst sample NBCN-7 was absent from Figure 2 and Figure S-5.

We have corrected these errors and the correct versions of Figure 2, Figure S-5 and Table S-2 are shown below.

Figure 2 3He/4He vs. 4He concentrations from crushing and laser heating (open symbols) of Nyurbinskaya diamonds. 3He/4He from the cubic diamonds are higher than the cloudy and coated diamonds and plot above MORB values suggesting the diamond-hosted inclusions contain a mixture of lithospheric and deep mantle volatiles. Uncertainties shown are 1σ and for 4He concentrations are smaller than symbol size.


Figure S-5 3He/4He vs. 20Ne/22Ne for Nyurbinskaya diamonds. The diamonds show a relationship between He and Ne and trend from air towards the value of the Siberian flood basalts (Basu et al., 1995). There is potentially a third component present from the SCLM (having lower 3He/4He composition) that causes the mixing line to be shallower (R = 5) than generally expected for mixing between air and mantle alone (R = 100). Data for Udachnaya xenoliths are shown for reference indicating they contain a greater proportion of radiogenic 4He from the SCLM relative to the Nyurbinskaya diamonds (Sumino et al., 2006). Reference data for SCLM, MORB and OIB are from Gautheron and Moreira (2002); Graham (2002) and Stuart et al. (2003), respectively.


Table S-2 Helium and Neon concentration and isotopic ratios from crushing and laser extraction (italics) from the Nyurbinskaya diamonds. Diamond NBCB-9, was not successfully crushed and the complete diamond was analysed by laser extraction for noble gases. All uncertainties are reported to 1σ. n.d = not determined.
SampleMass (mg)4He cm3 STP/g±3He/4He RA±20Ne cm3 STP/g±20Ne/22Ne±21Ne/22Ne±40Ar/36Ar±
NBCB-16.92.1 x 10-68.5 x 10-87.840.563.4 x 10-113.7 x 10-12n.dn.dn.dn.d2755.7198.1
4.3n.dn.dn.dn.d1.6 x 10-104.7 x 10-1310.040.040.03070.0014n.dn.d
NBCB-43.81.6 x 10-56.9 x 10-710.50.691.3 x 10-116.4 x 10-1110.430.140.03020.0011862.561.8
NBCB-561.3 x 10-55.9 x 10-711.230.745.1 x 10-102.7 x 10-1110.940.220.03680.00391956.9122
NBCB-95n.dn.dn.dn.d3.4 x 10-109.0 x 10-139.990.030.02880.0006n.dn.d
NBCB-75.82.3 x 10-61.2 x 10-79.950.773.6 x 10-101.9 x 10-1110.760.370.03210.0032352.125.2
NBRS-27.32.4 x 10-7 1.3 x 10-83.650.781.8 x 10-109.6 x 10-1210.150.860.02880.0053298.621.4
3.84.3 x 10-119.3 x 10-122.960.94n.dn.dn.dn.dn.dn.dn.dn.d
NBRS-55.17.5 x 10-73.8 x 10-88.620.62.1 x 10-101.2 x 10-1110.510.970.02940.007437.631.4
33.9 x 10-97.7 x 10-112.780.953.2 x 10-111.1 x 10-1310.160.040.02870.0013n.dn.d
NBRS-87.11.7 x 10-67.2 x 10-84.720.561.7 x 10-101.1 x 10-119.861.060.03230.007746124
4.59.8 x 10-103.2 x 10-115.620.37n.dn.dn.dn.dn.dn.dn.dn.d
NBCT-116.34.0 x 10-72.1 x 10-87.210.95.8 x 10-113.8 x 10-129.361.690.03340.0139339.124.2
3.4 3.9 x 10-9 3.1 x 10-11 6.18 0.22 4.0 x 10-11 1.4 x 10-13 10.02 0.03 0.0302 0.001 n.d n.d

The text and interpretation of the manuscript are unaffected by these changes. We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank Suzette Timmerman for bringing this issue to our attention.

Publisher's note: Figure 2 has been corrected in the online and PDF versions of the original article. Table S-2 and Figure S-5 have been corrected in the Supplementary Information PDF that accompanies the original article.