Supplementary Materials
X
-
ray Diffraction Samples and Measurements
X
-
ray diffraction analysis of the Rocknest scoop sample is described in
(
23
)
; similar analyses
were
performed for John Klein and Cumberland
. John Klein and Cumberland were
the
first two
drill samples collected by
Curiosity
. All
scoop
ed
or
drill
ed
samples pass through the Collection
and Handling for In situ Martian Rock Analysis (CHIMRA) sample collection and processing
system
(
10
)
. All powders for X
-
ray diffraction are processed
through a 150
-
m sieve before
delivering a portion to the CheMin inlet funnel.
The sieved drill powders were placed into
sample cells with 6 μm thick Mylar® windows.
Mylar
®
contributes a minor, broad scattering signature in diffraction patterns that is g
enerally
“swamped” by diffraction from the loaded sample. In addition, an aluminized light shield also
contributes “peaks” to the observed diffraction patterns. Only ~10 mm
3
of material is required to
fill the active volume of the sample cell, which is a d
isc
-
shaped volume 8 mm in diameter and
175
m thick. A collimated
∼
70 μm diameter X
-
ray beam illuminates the center of the sample
cell. A piezoelectric vibration system on each cell
pair
shakes the material dur
ing analysis,
causing
grains in the cell to pass through the X
-
ray beam in random orientations
.
CheMin measu
res XRD and XRF
data simultaneously using Co radiation in transmission
geometry
(
11
)
. The instrument operates in single
-
photon counting mode so that
between each
readout
the majority of CCD pixels
are struck by either a single X
-
ray photon or by no photons.
In this way, the system can determine both the energy of the photons striking the CCD (XRF)
and the two
-
dimensional (2
-
D) position of each photon (XRD). The energy and
positional
information of detected photons in each frame are summed over repeated 10
-
sec measurements
into a “minor frame” of 30 min of data (180 frames). The 2
-
D distribution of Co K
X
-
ray
intensity represents the XRD pattern of the sample. Circumferent
ial integration of these rings,
corrected for arc length, produces a conventional 1
-
D XRD pattern.
For conversion of the 2
-
D
CCD pattern to a 1
-
D pattern we have used FilmScan
©
software from Materials Data, Inc.
CheMin generally operates for only a few ho
urs each night
,
when the CCD
can be cooled to
its lowest tempe
rature, collecting as many minor frames as possible for the available analysis
time, usually five to seven per night.
XRD data were acquired over multiple nights for the John
Klein
and Cumberlan
d
drill sample
s
to provide acceptable counting statistics
. Total data
collection times
were 33.9
hr for John Klein and 20
.2
hr for Cumberland
. The data for individual
minor fra
mes and for each night’s analysi
s were examined separately, and there was no evi
dence
of any changes in instrumental parameters as a function of time over the duration of these
analyses. Before sample delivery and analysis, the empty cell was analyzed to confirm that it was
indeed empty before receiving the sample. The flight instrume
nt was calibrated on the ground
before flight using a quartz
-
beryl standard, and measurement of this standard on Mars showed no
changes in instrument geometry or dimensions.
Crystalline C
omponents.
All XRD data were first evaluated by comparisons and sear
ches of
the International Centre for Diffraction Data (ICDD) Powder Diffraction File using Bruker AXS
DIFFRAC.EVA (
©
2000, Bruker AXS, Karlsruhe, Germany) and MDI Jade
©
(Materials Data
Incorporated, Livermore, CA) software packages, which revealed the presence of p
lagioclase,
forsterite
,
magnetite,
augite, pigeonite,
orthopyroxene, akaganeite,
bassanite, and anhydrite.
John
Klein was the first drill sample analyzed and t
here was immediate evidence of a phyllosilicate,
represented by a br
oad diffraction peak at 8.5
-
11
2
Co Kα. The comparatively large
instrumental peak width for the CheMin instrument (~0.3
2
full
-
width at half
-
maximum at 25
2
) limits our ability to de
termine accurately the presence of
some
minor crystalline
phases (<2
wt. %). The data were analyzed further via Rietveld methods, using Topas (
©
2000, Bruker AXS,
Karlsruhe, Germany). We used the fundamental
-
parameters approach within Topas, along with
addi
tional convolutions, to model the experimental profiles. We also used an emission spectrum
including Co K
with a refinable Co K
component. The Rietveld method involves constructing
a model consisting of the crystal structures of all component phases, and
the differences between
the observed and simulated diffraction patterns are minimized by varying components of the
model, including scale factors (related to phase abundance), unit
-
cell parameters, and crystallite
-
size and strain broadening parameters for
each phase. Atomic positions and site occupancies
were generally not varied, although octahedral site occupancies were varied for forsteritic
olivine, augite, and pigeonite, and Na
-
Ca occupancies were varied for the plagioclase
component. This method thus
provides information on all well
-
ordered phases (
i.e.
, crystalline),
but it is not directly applicable to disordered phases such as clay minerals or amorphous
components.
Clay Mineral and
Amorphous
-
component Abundances
.
Neither smectites nor X
-
ray
amorph
ous samples are amenable to Rietveld analysis. Instead, the FULLPAT full
-
patter
n fitting
method was used
(
22
)
. FULLPAT operates on the principle that diffraction and scattering
patterns for all phases in a sample are additive. By fitting full diffraction p
atterns, including the
background, which contains important information on sample composition and matrix effects,
explicit analysis of amorphous or partially ordered materials can be accomplished if the
amorphous/disordered phases are included in t
he
analyses as distinct phases.
Thus, FULLPAT
allows direct analysis of the abundance of clay minerals and amorphous components, rather than
determining them as the difference from 100%
in an internal
-
standard quantitative analysis. Like
all full
-
pattern fitt
ing methods, accurate analysis requires representative standards or structure
models. A large variety of pure mineral standards, disordered materials (allophanes, ferrihydrite,
aluminosilicate gels),
and a synthetic
glass of Gusev
basaltic
composition were
measured. Each
of these was run as a pure phase and was also mixed with a beryl standard in 50:50 wt. ratio to
determine a Reference Intensity Ratio (RIR) for subsequent
use in FULLPAT
. All standard data
were measured on a CheMin IV instrument at the NA
SA Johnson Space Center; the CheMin IV
instrument geometry is very similar to the instrument on MSL and is considered a good proxy for
the flight instrument. Peak areas for each phase were compared against the intensity of
the
beryl
100
peak
, and the measu
red beryl RIR of 1.70 relative to corundum (measured on a laboratory
instrument) was used to convert the RIR(beryl) to the conventional RIR(corundum) value.
During FULLPAT analysis, the intensity of each standard pattern was normalized to the intensity
of
a pure pattern of corundum used as datum. Thus, using th
e
corundum datum 113 reflection
intensity and the measured RIR for each standard phase, the pattern of each disordered phase
could be normalized to the appropriate overall intensity based on its measu
red intensity area used
for the RIR determination.
Because few standard data for pure phases have been measured on the CheMin flight
instrument, an alternate method for calculating standard data representative of the MSL CheMin
instrument was also employed
. This process involved first determining instrumental peak shapes
and widths as
a
function of 2θ using the beryl standard measured on the MSL instrument. We
then calculated diffraction patterns for each standard using the appropriate crystal structure
in
formation and the instrumental profiles determined above for Co K
radiation. The final step
in calculation of standard data for FULLPAT is to normalize the intensity of the calculated
pattern to the corundum datum pattern using the calculated RIR as outli
ned above. The scaled
measured and calculated library patterns, for both ordered and amorphous phases, were then used
with FULLPAT.
Estimating Compositions and Abundances
of Clay Minerals and Amorphous C
omponents
from XRD and APXS data.
The relative prop
ortions of crystalline and amorphous plus smectite components and their
respective bulk compositions were estimated by combining the APXS chemical compositions of
the mudstone samples, and the chemical composition of crystalline components including Fe
oxi
dation state (from stoichiometry or XRD unit
-
cell parameters) weighted by their Che
Min
XRD abundance (
phases from plagioclase to pyrrhotite in
Table 1
in this paper). To estimate the
chemical composition
of the amorphous
material
relative
to that of
the
to
tal
amorphous plus
smectite component, the chemical compositions (H
2
O/OH
-
free basis) of two saponites were
assumed for the
trioctahedral
smectite
: griffithite and
Clay Minerals Society saponite
SapCa
-
1.
A
mong the clay min
erals analyzed
in the laboratory,
griffithite has
an
02
l
diffraction band
similar to the smectite component of both John Klein and Cumberland.
The proportion of each
smectite, calculated by increasing the smectite concentration until the MgO concentration in the
amorphous component was ~0
wt.%, is an upper limit for its concentration.
Table S
-
1
. Chemical composition of John Klei
n drill fines from APXS and CheMin
measurements, calculated chemical
compositions of crystalline and combined amorphous and smectite components, and calculated chemical compositions of
amorphous components assuming g
riffithite and
saponite
SapCa
-
1 as trioctahedral smectites.
APXS
XRD
Smectite+
Griffithite Model
e
SapCa
-
1 Model
f
(wt.%)
APXS
a
+CHMN
b
Crystalline
c
Amorphous
d
Griffithite
Amorphous
SapCa
-
1
Amorphous
SiO
2
42.07
42.03
42.65
41.76
49.71
32.94
57.60
30.10
TiO
2
0.97
0.97
-
0.02
1.41
-
0.01
2.98
0.56
2.03
Al
2
O
3
8.67
8.66
12.48
6.97
9.52
4.14
4.11
9.08
Cr
2
O
3
0.42
0.42
-
0.01
0.61
-
0.01
1.30
-
0.02
1.07
FeO+Fe
2
O
3
19.86
13.51
-
0.23
19.59
16.48
23.04
0.74
33.46
Fe
-
Cryst
0.00
0.47
1.51
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.01
FeO
-
Cryst
0.00
3.24
10.53
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Fe
2
O
3
-
Cryst
0.00
2.06
6.71
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Fe
2
O
3
-
npOx
0.00
0.58
1.87
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
MnO
0.27
0.27
0.00
0.39
0.07
0.75
0.03
0.66
MgO
9.06
9.05
4.88
10.90
20.66
0.07
25.70
0.01
CaO
7.76
7.75
9.47
6.99
2.83
11.61
7.72
6.46
Na
2
O
3.01
2.90
2.98
2.86
0.05
5.98
1.75
3.68
Na
-
Cryst
0.00
0.04
0.13
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
K
2
O
0.57
0.57
0.30
0.69
0.01
1.44
0.87
0.56
P
2
O
5
0.93
0.93
-
0.02
1.35
-
0.02
2.87
0.09
2.28
SO
3
5.61
3.83
1.07
5.05
-
0.09
10.76
0.07
8.72
S
-
Cryst
0.00
0.33
1.07
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.01
SO
3
-
Cryst
0.00
0.95
3.10
0.00
0.00
-
0.01
0.00
-
0.01
Cl
0.56
0.53
0.33
0.62
-
0.01
1.31
-
0.02
1.08
H
2
O
-
Cyst
0.00
0.12
0.40
0.00
0.00
-
0.01
0.00
0.00
Sum
99.76
99.20
99.20
99.20
99.19
99.19
99.20
99.19
Relative to Whole Sample
30.7
69.3
36.4
32.8
29.4
39.9
a
Composition of drill fines.
b
Composition
of
drill fines modified according to chemical composition of XRD crystalline phases
(excluding smectite).
c
Composition of XRD crystalline component calculated from compositions of individual
crystalline
components and thei
r re
lative proportions from Table 1
.
d
Composition of amorphous plus smectite component. Cr
2
O
3
, MnO,
and P
2
O
5
were
modeled with the amorphous component.
e
Composition of g
riffithite (H
2
O/OH
-
free basis) and the amorp
hous
phase c
alculated assuming g
riffithite is the smectite and MgO
~0 wt.% in the amorphous phase.
f
Composition of SapCa
-
1
(H
2
O/OH
-
free basis) and the amorphous phase calculated assuming SapCa
-
1 is the smectite and MgO
~0 wt.% in the
amorphous phase.
Table S
-
2.
Chemical composition of Cumberlan
d drill fines from APXS and CheMin
measurements, calculated chemical
compositions of crystalline and combined amorphous and smectite components, and calculated chemical compositions of
amorphous components assuming g
riffith
ite and
saponite
SapCa
-
1 as trioctahedral smectites.
APXS
XRD
Smectite+
Griffithite Model
e
SapCa
-
1 Model
f
(wt.%)
APXS
a
+CHMN
b
Crystalline
c
Amorphous
d
Griffithite
Amorphous
SapCa
-
1
Amorphous
SiO
2
43.02
43.33
43.72
43.15
49.71
34.98
57.59
31.54
TiO
2
0.97
0.98
0.57
1.16
-
0.01
2.62
0.57
1.64
Al
2
O
3
8.57
8.63
12.38
6.96
9.53
3.75
4.11
9.25
Cr
2
O
3
0.43
0.43
-
0.01
0.63
-
0.01
1.43
-
0.02
1.15
FeO+Fe
2
O
3
22.35
15.27
-
0.25
22.21
16.43
29.39
0.66
39.54
Fe
-
Cryst
0.00
0.38
1.23
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
FeO
-
Cryst
0.00
3.63
11.74
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Fe
2
O
3
-
Cryst
0.00
2.37
7.65
0.01
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.01
Fe
2
O
3
-
npOx
0.00
0.86
2.79
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
MnO
0.27
0.27
0.00
0.40
0.07
0.80
0.03
0.69
MgO
9.41
9.48
5.00
11.48
20.66
0.02
25.70
0.03
CaO
6.29
6.34
7.91
5.63
2.86
9.09
7.75
3.92
Na
2
O
2.98
2.87
2.86
2.97
0.05
6.60
1.74
3.95
Na
-
Cryst
0.00
0.05
0.08
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
K
2
O
0.50
0.50
0.39
0.55
0.01
1.23
0.88
0.30
P
2
O
5
0.95
0.96
-
0.02
1.39
-
0.02
3.16
0.08
2.44
SO
3
2.57
1.61
0.73
2.00
-
0.04
4.55
0.15
3.50
S
-
Cryst
0.00
0.28
0.74
0.07
0.00
0.17
0.00
0.13
SO
3
-
Cryst
0.00
0.28
0.91
0.00
0.00
-
0.01
0.00
-
0.01
Cl
1.39
0.53
0.32
0.63
-
0.01
1.43
-
0.02
1.15
H
2
O
-
Cyst
0.00
0.15
0.49
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Sum
99.70
99.20
99.24
99.24
99.23
99.23
99.23
99.23
Relative to Whole Sample
30.9
69.1
38.4
30.7
30.8
38.3
a
Composition of drill fines.
b
Composition
of
drill fines modified according to chemical composition of XRD crystalline phases
(excluding smectite).
c
Composition of XRD
crystalline component calculated from compositions of individual crystalline
components and thei
r re
lative proportions from Table 1
.
d
Composition of amorphous plus smectite component. Cr
2
O
3
, MnO,
and P
2
O
5
are modeled with the amorphous component.
e
Composit
ion of g
riffithite (H
2
O/OH
-
free basis) and the amorp
hous
phase calculated assuming g
riffithite is the smectite and MgO
~0 wt.% in the amorphous phase.
f
Composition of SapCa
-
1
(H
2
O/OH
-
free basis) and the amorphous phase calculated assuming SapCa
-
1 is the sm
ectite and MgO
~0 wt.% in the
amorphous phase.
Mastcam Hydration Signatures
The Mastcam instrument is a pair of CCD cameras with fixed focal lengths (34
-
mm and 100
-
mm) mounted roughly 2
-
m above the surface on the rover's mast
(
14
)
. Each camera obtains
images through a Bayer pattern of RGB filters and telecentric microlenses bonded onto the CCD
and an 8
-
position narrowband filter wheel that provides the ability to obtain spectra in 12 unique
wavelengths
(
41
)
. These multispectral obs
ervations have been calibrated to radiance (
I
) using
pre
-
flight calibration coefficients, to radiance factor (
I/F
, where
F
is the solar irradiance at the
top of the Martian atmosphere at the time of the observation) using associated observations of
the Ma
stcam calibration target, and to relative reflectance (
R*
) by dividing
I/F
by the cosine of
the solar incidence angle (a similar procedure was used to calibrate Mars Exploration Rover
(MER) Pancam images to
I/F
and
R*
;
(
66, 67
)
)
.
Mastcam’s longest waveleng
th filters have some sensitivity to hydrated and/or hydroxylated
minerals
(
27
)
. Specifically, the 1013 nm near
-
IR filters (referred to as filters L6 and R6
(
41
)
)
can
detect an absorption due to the 2ν
1
+ ν
3
H
2
O combination band and/or the 3ν OH overtone wh
en
this band minimum occurs longward of roughly 980
nm (
e.g
., as in water ice, some carbonates,
and hydrated sulfates). This narrow hydration band leads to a Mastcam spectral profile that is
“flat” in the near
-
IR, with a sharp downturn at the longest Mastc
am wavelength (Fig. 4
C
)
that
can be used as a “hydration signature.” This profile is distinguishable from spectra of iron
-
bearing minerals with broad absorptions near 1000
-
nm, which have an overall negative spectral
slope in the near
-
IR.
The Mastcam
hydration
signature can be used to remotely identify and map candidate
hydrated surface materials in Mastcam near
-
IR filter images based on the technique developed
for the MER Pancam instruments
(
16,
68
)
and applied to images acquired along the Spirit
(
16,
69
)
and Opportunity
(
38
,
70
)
traverses. Mastcam spectra exhibiting a hydration signature are
defined as those with a spectral slope (
R*
/
) in calibrated
R*
data from 937 to 1013
nm less
than
-
4.0 x 10
-
4
nm
-
1
and a nearly
-
flat
R*
spectral profile between
805 and 937
nm (with absolute
slope values less than 2.0 x 10
-
4
nm
-
1
). Slope thresholds were modified slightly from those used
for the Pancam hydration signature
(
16
)
in order to minimize noise in the Mastcam hydration
maps.
It is important
to note that
the absence of a
hydration signature in Mastcam data does not
necessarily indicate an absence of hydrated minerals; in the spectra of many H
2
O and/or OH
bearing minerals, including phyllosilicates
such as saponite (Fig. 4C)
, the hydration band is
centered
closer to 950
nm and cannot be detected by Mastcam’s longest wavelength filter. Of the
various hydration states of Ca
-
sulfate (gypsum, bassanite and anhydrite), only gypsum
(CaSO
4
•2H
2
O)
is detectable to Mastcam (
and also to MER Pancam
(
38
)
)
. Anhydrite
(CaSO
4
)
lacks a hydration band, and the weak hydration band in bassanite (CaSO
4
•0.5H
2
O) is centered
near 950
nm (Fig. 4C
).
Mapping of Light
-
toned Veins and Nodules in Borehole Walls
Light
-
toned veins and nodules are visible in both the John Klein and Cu
mberland bo
rehole
walls. Analyses by LIBS and APXS
indicate that these late
-
diagenetic features are associated
with Ca
-
sulfate; in contrast the mudstone matrix is relat
ively sulfate
-
poor (
8, 19
)
. Sulfate
minerals det
ected by CheMin in the borehole
samples
include anhydrite and bassanite. An initial
ChemCam RMI image taken to support localization
of the LIBS analysis spots
also showed a
striking di
stribution of veins and nodules
in the John Klein drill hole. Subsequently, to better
understand the distribution of late
-
diagenetic veins and nodules, several off
-
axis images of both
boreholes were taken using the Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI) to get relatively complete
coverage of the
borehole walls
to the full visible depth
. Some images w
ere acquired at night
using
MAHLI
white light LED
illumination
. The images were processed to compare the
light
-
toned vein
and nodule
abundances between John K
lein and Cumberland, and to compare sulfa
te
mineral abundances determined by CheMin with mapped
abundances of light
-
toned
fillings
.
Drill
hole depth and wall visibility
-
Both the John Klein and Cumberland holes were drilled
to a depth of about 6.5 cm. Autofocused MAHLI image sub
-
frames covering
only the floor of
each hole
—
acquired shortly after drilling was completed on the same sol that the rock was
drilled
—
provided a measure of the distance between the camera lens and the bottom of the hole.
Similar autofocused sub
-
frames acquired outside the h
ole permitted subtraction of one from the
other to estimate
hole
depth. In both cases, the hole was measured to be about 3.2 ± 0.3 cm deep.
While the drill penetrated to 6.5 cm, drill cuttings/debris filled the lower half of each after the
drill bit was wi
thdrawn. These ranges, relative to the MAHLI lens, were estimated from its focus
motor count position (
m
), which, when the dust cover is open and the range is between 2.1 and
210 cm, relates to range (
r
, in cm) between lens and target by
r
= ((
0.576786
m
–
1
)
+ (
–
11.8479) +
(2.80153×10
–
3
m
) + (
–
2.266488×10
–
7
m
2
) + (6.26666×10
–
12
m
3
))
–
1
. Thus, for the drill hole wa
ll
analysis presented here,
only half of the depth and half of the surface area of each wall was
observed.
Processing
-
Of the focus stack images
acquired at each drill hole, those that were in best
focus on the drill hole walls were chosen to accurately represent the entire surface area of the
drill hole. Both the John Klein and Cumberland drill holes have MAHLI images from four map
directions (app
roximately S,
W,
N,
E). Some of
the MAHLI nighttime
LED
-
illuminated images
show more detail of the vein material than do the day, solar
-
illuminated, images, such as the W,
N and E images for Cumberland. Images with the least compression and best focus and
contrast
were selected and each was cropped in Adobe Photoshop© to 1903
pixels wide and 1847 p
ixels
high, or 6.343 inches wide and 6.157 i
nches high, at 300 dpi. The width is slightly larger than the
height due to the ellipsoid shape of the drill hole as v
iewed from off
-
axis angles.
A master image
was created to hold all the im
ages. The master image is 3805 pixels wide and 3693 p
ixels high,
or 25.543 inches wide and 24.597 inches high, at 300 dpi. Drill hole images were aligned from
left to right in order S
, W, N, E with the long axis of the drill hole ellipse oriented left
-
right.
Some of the images were tilted and/or had different image scales. In order to correct this, one
drill hole image was selected to be the template orientation (long axis left
-
right)
and size. A new
layer was created so that an ellipse template could be created to correctly align and size the othe
r
images. In the new layer the elliptical m
arquee t
ool was used to trace
out an ellipse that exactly
fit
the image that was selected as the b
ase image. That layer was copied and pasted to cover all
four images. Each drill hole image was then aligned
with the t
ransformation tool to best fit the
ellipse template and the opacity of the ellipse templates was adjusted to 50%. The drill hole
ellipse
template was used as the surface area marker for mapping. Some of the images
overlapped, in which case the image with the best representation of the vein was used.
Easily identifiable marks in the images were used to end one image and start another, so th
at
the entire surface was represented with no overlap. The e
llipses were then cut with the p
o
lygonal
l
asso tool to represent
the mapping area. The regular l
asso tool was used to remove
from the
image
any drill cuttings or debris
visible on the bottom of th
e drill hole. All four images were
then converted to greyscale (se
cond row of images in Figs. S
-
1 and S
-
2). The bottom row of
images was processed to enhance contrast to better show the veins. Next, the previously created
surface area marker layers were co
pied and placed over the bottom row of high contrast images.
These were used to cut out un
-
mapped areas of the drill holes. Each drill
-
hole image was cut and
copied into a new layer. Surface
-
area marker layers were proces
sed one at a time by using the
colo
r r
ange tool to sel
ect light
-
toned vein
material. The vein representation was increased to
include d
ifferent shades
by selecting additional vein colors until a good representation of the
veins was obtained. The selected area
was added or removed with the l
asso tool. After this was
done, the actual drill hole image was deselected and the surface area marker was selected to
create a simple representation of the vein in the mapping area.
The vein
-
to
-
total surface area percentage was derived from this final rep
resentation. The
surface area marker was selected with
the magic wand t
oo
l and the expanded view of the
h
istogram window. With the full area minus the vein area, the histogram
window was refreshed
to give a p
ixel amount. This was repeated for every surface
area marker and the results were used
to calculate vein/(vein + surface minus vein) = percent vein per total surface area.
Results
-
The surface area of vein exposure in Cumberland is ~1.7%, very similar to the total
sulfate mineral abundance of 1.5% (bassanite plus anhydrite, based on the abundances in Table
1).
The surface area of vein exposure in John Klein is ~5.2%, compared with a
total
sulfate
mineral abundance of 3.6
% (bassanite plus anhydrite, based on the abundances in Table
1
). The
apparent excess of mapped vein area compared to sulfate mineral abundance
, notably in the John
Klein borehole and sample,
could be attributed to sev
eral factors, including the generally low
grain densities of the Ca
-
sulfates (ρ ~2.73 for bassanite to ~2.97 for anhydrite, slight
ly
more than
andesine at ~2.67 but less than the pyroxenes at ~3.3
-
3.7 and much less than magnetite at ~5.1).
However, the gre
ater contributors to the difference are likely to be the
inabilit
y to map
the full
borehole depth because of fill
(the upper ~1.5 cm of the borehole does not make it into t
he
sample processing system (
10
)
)
, the
unknown bulk densities of both the veins and
the matrix, the
errors in image analysis and quantitative c
rystalline XRD, and the errors
in estimating
abundances of the amorphous and c
lay mineral components from
XRD data.
Nevertheless, the
mapped vein areas
in both boreholes
are sufficient to account f
or all of th
e sulfates detected by
XRD
.
Fig. S
-
1: Analysis of veins in the John Klein borehole wall. Upper row shows primary images
in grayscale with sectors (black) selected for mapping from each MAHLI image
(MAHLI
images collected on sol 270)
. Second
row from top shows contrast
-
stretched images (note dark
LIBS laser spots in the north image). Bottom row shows images processed to enhance the pixel
representation of vein and nodule abundances for quantitative analysis; total vein and nodule
area is 5.18
% of the borehole wall.
Fig. S
-
2. Analysis of veins in the Cumberland borehole wall. Upper row shows primary
images in grayscale with sectors (black) selected for mapping from each MAHLI image
(MAHLI images collected on sol 279)
. Second row from top show
s contrast
-
stretched images.
Bottom row shows images processed for pixel representation of vein and nodule abundances;
vein and nodule area is 1.74% of the borehole wall.
Mars Science Laboratory Science Team:
Achilles, Cherie
Jacobs Technology (at NASA
JSC)
Agard, Christophe
CNES (Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales)
Alves Verdasca, José Alexandre
CAB (Centro de Astrobiología)
Anderson, Robert
NASA JPL
Anderson, Ryan
USGS Flagstaff
Archer, Doug
NASA Postdoc Program (at NASA JSC)
Armiens
-
Aparicio,
Carlos
CAB (Centro de Astrobiología)
Arvidson, Ray
WUSTL (Washington University in St. Louis)
Atlaskin, Evgeny
FMI (Finnish Meteorological Institute) and University of Helsinki
Atreya, Sushil
University of Michigan Ann Arbor
Aubrey, Andrew
NASA JPL
Baker, Burt
MSSS (Malin Space Science Systems)
Baker, Michael
Caltech
Balic
-
Zunic, Tonci
University of Copenhagen
Baratoux, David
IRAP (Institut de Recherche en Astrophysique et Planetologie)
Baroukh, Julien
CNES (Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales)
Barraclough, Bruce
PSI (Planetary Science Institute)
Bean, Keri
Texas A&M
Beegle, Luther
NASA JPL
Behar, Alberto
NASA JPL
Bell, James
ASU (Arizona State University)
Bender, Steve
PSI (Planetary Science Institute)
Benna, Mehdi
University of Maryland
Baltimore County (at NASA GSFC)
Bentz, Jennifer
University of Saskatchewan
Berger, Gilles
IRAP (Institut de Recherche en Astrophysique et Planetologie)
Berger, Jeff
University of New Mexico (Western Univ. May 1)
Berman, Daniel
PSI (Planetary Science
Institute)
Bish, David
Indiana University Bloomington
Blake, David F.
NASA Ames
Blanco Avalos, Juan J.
Universidad de Alcalá de Henares
Blaney, Diana
NASA JPL
Blank, Jen
BAER (at NASA Ames)
Blau, Hannah
University of Massachusetts
Bleacher, Lora
USRA
-
LPI (at NASA GSFC)
Boehm, Eckart
University of Kiel
Botta, Oliver
Swiss Space Office
Böttcher, Stephan
University of Kiel
Boucher, Thomas
University of Massachusetts
Bower, Hannah
University of Maryland College Park
Boyd, Nick
University of
Guelph
Boynton, Bill
University of Arizona
Breves, Elly
Mount Holyoke College
Bridges, John
University of Leicester
Bridges, Nathan
APL (Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory)
Brinckerhoff, William
NASA GSFC
Brinza, David
NASA JPL
Bristow, Thomas
NASA Postdoc Program (at NASA Ames)
Brunet, Claude
CSA (Canadian Space Agency)
Brunner, Anna
University of Maryland College Park (at GSFC)
Brunner, Will
inXitu
Buch, Arnaud
LGPM, Ecole Centrale Paris (Laboratoire Génie des Procédés et
Matériaux)
Bullock, Mark
SwRI (Southwest Research Institute)
Burmeister, Sönke
University of Kiel
Cabane, Michel
LATMOS (Laboratoire Atmosphères, Milieux, Observations
Spatiales)
Calef, Fred
NASA JPL
Cameron, James
Lightstorm Entertainment Inc.
Campbell, John "Iain"
University of Guelph
Cantor, Bruce
MSSS (Malin Space Science Systems)
Caplinger, Michael
MSSS (Malin Space Science Systems)
Caride Rodríguez, Javier
CAB (Centro de Astrobiología)
Carmosino, Marco
University of Massachusetts
Carrasco Blázquez, Isaías
CAB (Centro de Astrobiología)
Charpentier, Antoine
ATOS Origin
Chipera, Steve
Chesapeake Energy
Choi, David
NASA Postdoc Program (at NASA GSFC)
Clark, Benton
SSI (Space Science Institute)
Clegg, Sam
LANL (Los Alamos National
Lab)
Cleghorn, Timothy
NASA JSC
Cloutis, Ed
University of Winnipeg
Cody, George
Carnegie Institution of Washington
Coll, Patrice
LISA (Laboratoire Interuniversitaire des Systèmes
Atmosphériques), Université Paris
Conrad, Pamela
NASA GSFC
Coscia,
David
LATMOS (Laboratoire Atmosphères, Milieux, Observations
Spatiales)
Cousin, Agnès
LANL (Los Alamos National Lab)
Cremers, David
ARA (Applied Research Associates, Inc.)
Crisp, Joy
NASA JPL
Cros, Alain
IRAP (Institut de Recherche en Astrophysique et
Planetologie)
Cucinotta, Frank
NASA JSC
d’Uston, Claude
IRAP (Institut de Recherche en Astrophysique et Planetologie)
Davis, Scott
MSSS (Malin Space Science Systems)
Day, Mackenzie "Kenzie"
University of Texas at Austin
de la Torre Juarez, Manuel
NASA
JPL
DeFlores, Lauren
NASA JPL
DeLapp, Dorothea
LANL (Los Alamos National Lab)
DeMarines, Julia
Denver Museum of Nature & Science
DesMarais, David
NASA Ames
Dietrich, William
University of California Berkeley
Dingler, Robert
LANL (Los Alamos National
Lab)
Donny, Christophe
CNES (Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales)
Downs, Bob
University of Arizona
Drake, Darrell
retired
Dromart, Gilles
LGL
-
TPE (Laboratoire de Géologié de Lyon : Terre, Planète,
Environnement )
Dupont, Audrey
CS Systemes
d'Information
Duston, Brian
MSSS (Malin Space Science Systems)
Dworkin, Jason
NASA GSFC
Dyar, M. Darby
Mount Holyoke College
Edgar, Lauren
ASU (Arizona State University)
Edgett, Kenneth
MSSS (Malin Space Science Systems)
Edwards, Christopher
Caltech
Edwards, Laurence
NASA Ames
Ehlmann, Bethany
Caltech
Ehresmann, Bent
SwRI (Southwest Research Institute)
Eigenbrode, Jen
NASA GSFC
Elliott, Beverley
University of New Brunswick
Elliott, Harvey
University of Michigan Ann Arbor
Ewing, Ryan
University
of Alabama
Fabre, Cécile
G2R (Géologié et Gestion des Ressources Minérales et
Energétique)
Fairén, Alberto
Cornell University
Farley, Ken
Caltech
Farmer, Jack
ASU (Arizona State University)
Fassett, Caleb
Mount Holyoke College
Favot, Laurent
Capgemini France
Fay, Donald
MSSS (Malin Space Science Systems)
Fedosov, Fedor
Space Research Institute
Feldman, Jason
NASA JPL
Feldman, Sabrina
NASA JPL
Fisk, Marty
Oregon State University
Fitzgibbon, Mike
University of Arizona
Flesch, Greg
NASA
JPL
Floyd, Melissa
NASA GSFC
Flückiger, Lorenzo
Carnegie Mellon University (at NASA Ames)
Forni, Olivier
IRAP (Institut de Recherche en Astrophysique et Planetologie)
Fraeman, Abby
WUSTL (Washington University in St. Louis)
Francis, Raymond
University
of Western Ontario
François, Pascaline
LISA (Laboratoire Interuniversitaire des Systèmes
Atmosphériques), Université Paris
Franz, Heather
University of Maryland Baltimore County (at NASA GSFC)
Freissinet, Caroline
NASA Postdoc Program (at NASA GSFC)
French, Katherine Louise
MIT
Frydenvang, Jens
University of Copenhagen
Gaboriaud, Alain
CNES (Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales)
Gailhanou, Marc
CNRS (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)
Garvin, James
NASA GSFC
Gasnault, Olivier
IRAP
(Institut de Recherche en Astrophysique et Planetologie)
Geffroy, Claude
IC2MP (Institut de Chimie des Milieux et Matériaux de Poitiers)
Gellert, Ralf
University of Guelph
Genzer, Maria
FMI (Finnish Meteorological Institute)
Glavin, Daniel
NASA GSFC
G
odber, Austin
ASU (Arizona State University)
Goesmann, Fred
Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research
Goetz, Walter
Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research
Golovin, Dmitry
Space Research Institute
Gómez Gómez, Felipe
Centro de Astrobiología
Gómez
-
Elvira, Javier
Centro de Astrobiología
Gondet, Brigitte
IAS (Institut d'Astrophysique Spatiale)
Gordon, Suzanne
University of New Mexico
Gorevan, Stephen
Honeybee Robotics
Grant, John
Smithsonian Institution
Griffes, Jennifer
Caltech
Grinspoon, David
Denver Museum of Nature & Science
Grotzinger, John
Caltech
Guillemot, Philippe
CNES (Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales)
Guo, Jingnan
SwRI (Southwest Research Institute)
Gupta, Sanjeev
Imperial College
Guzewich, Scott
NASA Postdoc
Program (at NASA GSFC)
Haberle, Robert
NASA Ames
Halleaux, Douglas
University of Michigan Ann Arbor
Hallet, Bernard
University of Washington Seattle
Hamilton, Vicky
(SwRI) Southwest Research Institute
Hardgrove, Craig
MSSS (Malin Space Science
Systems)
Harker, David
MSSS (Malin Space Science Systems)
Harpold, Daniel
NASA GSFC
Harri, Ari
-
Matti
FMI (Finnish Meteorological Institute)
Harshman, Karl
University of Arizona
Hassler, Donald
SwRI (Southwest Research Institute)
Haukka, Harri
FMI
(Finnish Meteorological Institute)
Hayes, Alex
Cornell University
Herkenhoff, Ken
USGS Flagstaff
Herrera, Paul
MSSS (Malin Space Science Systems)
Hettrich, Sebastian
CAB (Centro de Astrobiología)
Heydari, Ezat
Jackson State University
Hipkin,
Victoria
CSA (Canadian Space Agency)
Hoehler, Tori
NASA Ames
Hollingsworth, Jeff
NASA Ames
Hudgins, Judy
Salish Kootenai College
Huntress, Wesley
Retired
Hurowitz, Joel
NASA JPL
Hviid, Stubbe
Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research
Iagnemma,
Karl
MIT
Indyk, Steve
Honeybee Robotics
Israël, Guy
CNRS and LATMOS
Jackson, Ryan
LANL (Los Alamos National Lab)
Jacob, Samantha
University of Hawai'i at Manoa
Jakosky, Bruce
University of Colorado Boulder
Jensen, Elsa
MSSS (Malin Space Science
Systems)
Jensen, Jaqueline Kløvgaard
University of Copenhagen
Johnson, Jeffrey
APL (Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory)
Johnson, Micah
Microtel (at NASA GSFC)
Johnstone, Steve
LANL (Los Alamos National Lab)
Jones, Andrea
USRA
-
LPI (at
NASA GSFC)
Jones, John
NASA JSC
Joseph, Jonathan
Cornell University
Jun, Insoo
NASA JPL
Kah, Linda
University of Tennessee Knoxville
Kahanpää, Henrik
FMI (Finnish Meteorological Institute)
Kahre, Melinda
NASA Ames
Karpushkina, Natalya
Space Research
Institute
Kasprzak, Wayne
NASA GSFC
Kauhanen, Janne
FMI (Finnish Meteorological Institute)
Keely, Leslie
NASA Ames
Kemppinen, Osku
FMI (Finnish Meteorological Institute)
Keymeulen, Didier
NASA JPL
Kim, Myung
-
Hee
USRA (at NASA JSC)
Kinch, Kjartan
University of Copenhagen
King, Penny
ANU (Australian National University)
Kirkland, Laurel
LPI (Lunar and Planetary Institute)
Kocurek, Gary
University of Texas at Austin
Koefoed, Asmus
University of Copenhagen
Köhler, Jan
University of Kiel
Kortmann, Onno
University of California Berkeley
Kozyrev, Alexander
Space Research Institute
Krezoski, Jill
MSSS (Malin Space Science Systems)
Krysak, Daniel
MSSS (Malin Space Science Systems)
Kuzmin, Ruslan
Space Research Institute and Vernadsky Insti
tute