Influence of errors of geochemical analyses on genetic geodynamic and geological conclusions

The influence of analytical errors of geochemical analyses on genetic conclusions is typically underestimated by researchers. The composition of rocks or minerals, as a rule, is shown on diagrams as a point, actually with no size, however, all analyses should be presented on diagrams as fields rather than points. The larger the analytical error, the larger the field. It is shown that all genetic geochemical diagrams, interpretations, and conclusions are senseless with analytical errors of ~30 % and more, because the area of the “point” (more precisely, the field) of a single analysis in this case can cover 2–3 different geodynamic fields. Specific examples of results of ICP-MS analyses of different rocks with high analytical errors are shown. An example of erroneous geodynamic interpretations, which are based on geochemical data only, includes the island-arc classification of Triassic volcanic rocks of Western Siberia. Initiatives for the increasing the accuracy of geochemical analyses are proposed.