<div>Indicator minerals are those minerals that indicate the presence of a specific mineral deposit, alteration or lithology[1]. Their utility to the exploration industry has been demonstrated in a range of environments and across multiple deposit types including Cu-Au porphyry[2], Cu-Zn-Pb-Ag VMS[3] and Ni-Cu-PGE[4]. Recent developments in the field of SEM-EDS analysis have enabled the rapid quantitative identification of indicator minerals during regional sampling campaigns[4,5].</div><div>Despite the demonstrated utility of indicator minerals for diamond and base metal exploration in Canada, Russia and Africa, there are relatively few case studies published from Australian deposits. We present the results of an indicator mineral case study over the Julimar exploration project located 90 km NE of Perth. The Gonneville Ni-Cu-PGE deposit, discovered by Chalice Mining in 2020, is hosted within a ~30 km long belt of 2670 Ma ultramafic intrusions within the western margin of the Yilgarn Craton[6].</div><div>Stream sediments collected from drainage channels around the Gonneville deposit were analysed by quantitative mineralogy techniques to determine if a unique indicator mineral footprint exists there. Samples were processed and analysed for heavy minerals using a workflow developed for the Curtin University-Geoscience Australia Heavy Mineral Map of Australia project[7]. Results indicate elevated abundances of indicator minerals associated with ultramafic/mafic magmatism and Ni-sulfide mineralisation in the drainages within the Julimar project area, including pyrrhotite, pentlandite, pyrite and chromite. We conclude that indicator mineral studies using automated mineralogy are powerful, yet currently underutilised, tools for mineral exploration in Australian environments.</div><div>[1]McClenaghan, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1144/1467-7873/03-066 </div><div>[2]Hashmi et al., 2015. https://doi.org/10.1144/geochem2014-310 </div><div>[3]Lougheed et al., 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/min10040310 </div><div>[4]McClenaghan &amp; Cabri, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1144/1467-7873/10-IM-026 </div><div>[5]Porter et al., 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oregeorev.2020.103406 </div><div>[6]Lu et al., 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.35768.47367 </div><div>[7]Caritat et al., 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/min12080961 </div> This Abstract was submitted/presented to the 2023 Australian Exploration Geoscience Conference 13-18 Mar (https://2023.aegc.com.au/)

<div>Geochemical and mineralogical analysis of surficial materials (streams, soils, catchment samples, etc) can provide valuable information about the potential for mineral systems, and the background mineralogical and geochemical variation for a region. However, collecting new samples can be time consuming and expensive, particularly for regional-scale studies. Fortunately, Geoscience Australia has a large holding of archived samples from regional- to continental-scale geochemical studies conducted over the last 50 years, the majority collected at high sampling densities that would be cost-prohibitive today. Although all these samples have already been analysed, their vintage can mean that analyses were obtained by a variety of analytical methods, are of variable quality, and often only available for a small number of elements. As part of the Australian government’s Exploring for the Future program, funding was dedicated to re-analyse ~9,000 samples from these legacy surveys. They were re-analysed for 63 elements (total content) at a single laboratory producing a seamless, internally consistent, high-quality dataset, providing valuable new insights.</div><div><br></div><div>A large number (7,700) of these legacy samples were collected from north Queensland, predominantly in the Cape York – Georgetown area (5,472) — an area with both a wide-range of existing deposit types and known potential for many critical minerals. The sample densities of these studies, up to 1 sample per ~2.5 km2 for Georgetown, makes them directly applicable for determining local- and regional-scale areas of interest for mineral potential. Early interpretation of the Cape York – Georgetown data has identified several locations with stream sediments enriched in both heavy and light rare earth elements (maximum 4000 and 31,800 ppm, respectively), demonstrating the potential of this dataset, particularly for critical minerals. The greater sampling density means that these samples can also provide much more granular geochemical background information and contribute to our understanding of the lower density data commonly used in regional- and national-scale geochemical background studies.</div><div><br></div><div>In addition to the geochemical re-analysis of legacy surface samples, Geoscience Australia has also been undertaking mineral analysis of legacy continental-scale geochemical samples. The National Geochemical Survey of Australia (NGSA) sample archive has been utilised to provide a valuable new dataset. By separating and identifying heavy minerals (i.e., those with a specific gravity >2.9 g/cm3) new information about the mineral potential and provenance of samples can be gained. The Heavy Mineral Map of Australia (HMMA) project, undertaken in collaboration with Curtin University, has analysed the NGSA sample archive, with~81% coverage of the continent. The project has identified over 145 million individual mineral grains belonging to 163 unique mineral species. Preliminary analysis of the data has indicated that zinc minerals and native elements may be useful for mineral prospectivity. Due to the large amount of data generated as part of this HMMA project, a mineral network analysis tool has been developed to help visualise the relationship between minerals and aid in the interpretation of the data. Abstract presented to the Australian Institute of Geoscientists – ALS Friday Seminar Series: Geophysical and Geochemical Signatures of Queensland Mineral Deposits October 2023 (https://www.aig.org.au/events/aig-als-friday-seminar-series-geophysical-and-geochemical-signatures-of-qld-mineral-deposits/)