Trace Element Assemblages of Pseudomorphic Iron Oxyhydroxides of the Pobeda-1 Hydrothermal Field, 17°08.7′ N, Mid-Atlantic Ridge: The Development of a Halmyrolysis Model from LA-ICP-MS Data

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Weathering of sulfides is a ubiquitous process in both ancient and modern seafloor after the exposure of orebodies. Although the associated studies are rare, there is no doubt that this process has important influence for the storage of sulfide resource and impact for the marine environment. So, I consider that this paper is definitely worthwhile publication. In addition, this paper is very well written, slightly minor revision is therefore recommended by me. I have only one question: as we know, the seafloor massive sulfides can be divided into both ultramafic- and mafic-hosted, I’m interested if there exists obvious difference for the weathering processes of sulfides and the incorporation of TEs in the secondary minerals?

 

 

Keywords: delete the bullet “correlation and R-factor analyses”.

Line 42: propose-proposed.

Line 43: Since the Pobeda-1 field is close associated with ultramafic rocks, one more study associated with the distribution of TEs in sulfides from ultramafic-hosted Tianzuo field along SWIR is recommended below, which may provide the authors some information about the sulfides within ultramafic systems for comparison.

Ding, T., Wang, J., Tao, C.H., Dias, A.A., Liang, J., Wang, Y., Chen, J., Wu, B., Huang, H., 2022. Trace-element compositions of sulfides from inactive Tianzuo hydrothermal field, Southwest Indian Ridge: Implications for ultramafic rocks hosting mineralization. Ore Geology Reviews 140, 104421.

Line 390: the above reference is also a suitable citation in this position.

Figure 10. Is there any difference for the REE concentrations of hydrothermal fluids from ultramafic and mafic systems? As the Pobeda-1 field is obvious ultramafic-hosted to me.

Conclusion: Just a suggestion, authors proposed a good explanation for the possible occurrences of the TEs, namely in a variation of secondary minerals. I think additional microscopic images for such minerals might solid evidence supporting the authors’ viewpoints, such as clay, barite, atacamite, opal, and aragonite.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I reviewed the manuscript drafted by Maslennikov v.v. and the coauthors. In this paper, the authors carry out the detailed LA-ICP-MS analysis on sulfides and IOHs from the Pobeda-1 hydrothermal field to discuss the trace element geochemical behaviors during the oxidation of hydrothermal sulfides, which is important for deepening our understanding of the sulfide halmyrolysis. The authors did an excellent work and provided robust proofs, and this manuscript is logically constructed. Therefore, I recommend this manuscript be published in Minerals after a minor revision.

 

The following are my detailed comments:

 

1. The purpose or significance of this research should be pointed out in the Abstract.

2. Line 66: Check the word “parttiioning”. I think it should be partitioning.

3. Section 4.1: The mineral sequences of the studied sample is quite complicated. I advise you add a simple explanation of the related geological process that accounted for the complicated mineralogy, which might be helpful for the understanding of the trace element partitioning.

4. Line 219: The isocubanite–chalcopyrite are characterized by high Se contents, why the low Se contents of digenite is inherited from the isocubanite–chalcopyrite?

5. Line 565-566: The Pb contents in seawater is particularly low. So I think you should be careful about this statement. I prefer that the Pb is inherited from sulfides.

6. Section 5.8: Whether the model is restricted to the studied field or can be extended to other hydrothermal fields. And I advise you to add a paragraph to express the enlightenment of this research.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

I agree with the publication of the article. You realized a complex study of the contents of the trace elements associated with the secondary minerals in the seafloor using modern analysis modern and complex interpretation of the results.

Author Response

Thank You very much for the positive assessment