AnEXTENDED ABSTRACTis available for download._x000D_
A full-length paper was notprepared for this presentation._x000D_
Traditional models employed to genetically link associated chromite and platinum-group elements have favoured crustal contamination as the primary process for inducing sulfide and oxide saturation._x000D_
The association of chromite ores with crustal contamination is well established in the literature. However, in the 1970s (cf Irvine, 1973, 1975), Irvine demonstrated that crustal contamination was in fact problematic as a tool for inducing chromite precipitation in mafic to ultramafic magmas. His results are re-examined here, along with some attempts to reconcile them with the effects of adding Fe to the models. It is concluded that crustal contamination is indeed problematic based on phase relationships alone. However, the role of fluids as a compensating agent is evaluated, which may explain why crustal contamination may indeed facilitate oxide and sulfide precipitation.CITATION:Prevec, S A, 2015. Chromite and platinum-group elements coprecipitation by crustal contamination or magma mixing revisited - genetic and exploration implications, in Proceedings PACRIM 2015 Congress, pp 311-316 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).