## 4 Results
### Diamagnetic Sub-Samples  
The mean composition of diamagnetic fractions is shown in Table 7. In the light diamagnetic sub-samples, the content of SiO\({}_{2}\) was 78.09 \(\pm\) 0.60 wt.%, Al\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\) was 11.99 \(\pm\) 0.43 wt.%, Fe\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\) was 0.34 \(\pm\) 0.02 wt.%, Na\({}_{2}\)O was 3.39 \(\pm\) 0.22 wt.%, and K\({}_{2}\)O was 4.38 \(\pm\) 0.42 wt.%. In the intermediate sub-samples, the content of SiO\({}_{2}\) was 77.90 \(\pm\) 0.62 wt.%, Al\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\) was 12.04 \(\pm\) 0.42 wt.%, Fe\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\) was 0.33 \(\pm\) 0.03 wt.%, Na\({}_{2}\)O was 3.44 \(\pm\) 0.19 wt.%, and K\({}_{2}\)O was 4.34 \(\pm\) 0.47 wt.%. Regarding the heavy sub-samples, the content of SiO\({}_{2}\) was 78.17 \(\pm\) 0.74 wt.%, Al\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\) was 11.989 \(\pm\) 0.55 wt.%, Fe\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\) was 0.34 \(\pm\) 0.03 wt.%, Na\({}_{2}\)O was 3.47 \(\pm\) 0.2 wt.%, and K\({}_{2}\)O was 4.10 \(\pm\) 0.48 wt.%. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**ppm** & **Mean \(\pm\) std. dev.** \\ \hline La & 60 \(\pm\) 8 \\ Ce & 127 \(\pm\) 16 \\ Pr & 14 \(\pm\) 2 \\ Nd & 51 \(\pm\) 8 \\ Sm & 9.2 \(\pm\) 1.0 \\ Eu & 0.94 \(\pm\) 0.06 \\ Gd & 6.9 \(\pm\) 0.9 \\ Tb & 0.98 \(\pm\) 0.13 \\ Dy & 5.1 \(\pm\) 0.5 \\ Ho & 0.98 \(\pm\) 0.07 \\ Er & 2.6 \(\pm\) 0.1 \\ Tm & 0.40 \(\pm\) 0.02 \\ Yb & 2.5 \(\pm\) 0.2 \\ Lu & 0.43 \(\pm\) 0.02 \\ \(\Sigma\)REE & 285 \(\pm\) 36 \\ Th & 29 \(\pm\) 1 \\ U & 3.9 \(\pm\) 0.7 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Average composition in terms of REE, thorium, and uranium in crushing powders (3 analyzed samples). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**wt.\%** & **Mean \(\pm\) std. dev.** \\ \hline SiO\({}_{2}\) & 70.70 \(\pm\) 0.57 \\ TiO\({}_{2}\) & 0.27 \(\pm\) 0.07 \\ Al\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\) & 14.64 \(\pm\) 0.38 \\ Fe\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\) & 2.21 \(\pm\) 0.41 \\ MnO & 0.06 \(\pm\) 0.01 \\ MgO & 0.82 \(\pm\) 0.36 \\ CaO & 2.00 \(\pm\) 0.24 \\ Na\({}_{2}\)O & 3.42 \(\pm\) 0.15 \\ K\({}_{2}\)O & 5.04 \(\pm\) 0.49 \\ P\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{5}\) & 0.16 \(\pm\) 0.04 \\ L.O.I. & 0.69 \(\pm\) 0.15 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Mean composition of the crushing powders (9 analyzed samples). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**wt.\%** & **Mean \(\pm\) std. dev.** \\ \hline Quartz & 26.5 \(\pm\) 0.9 \\ Orthoclase & 29.8 \(\pm\) 2.9 \\ Albite & 28.9 \(\pm\) 1.3 \\ Anorthite & 8.8 \(\pm\) 1.0 \\ Total & 94.0 \(\pm\) 1.7 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Mean quartz, orthoclase, albite, and anorthite abundance obtained by CIPW norm calculation in the crushing powder samples (9 sample). The average abundances of quartz, alkali feldspars, and plagioclase in diamagnetic fractions, calculated by CIPW norm, are shown in Table 8. Quartz was on average 39.0 \(\pm\) 1.4 wt.% with values ranging between 37.4 and 41.4 wt.%; orthoclase showed an average abundance of 25.9 \(\pm\) 2.5 wt.% and ranging between 22.3 and 31.0 wt.%% albite was on average 28.7 \(\pm\) 1.9 wt.% ranging between 25.3 and 31.5 wt.%; anorthite was on average 4.6 \(\pm\) 1.1 wt.% ranging between 3.1 and 6.6 wt.%. Concerning intermediate sub-samples, quartz was on average 39.0 \(\pm\) 1.4 wt.% with values ranging between 37.4 and 41.4 wt.%; orthoclase showed an average abundance of 25.9 \(\pm\) 2.5 wt.% and ranging between 22.3 and 31.0 wt.%% albite was on average 28.7 \(\pm\) 1.9 wt.% ranging between 25.3 and 31.5 wt.%; anorthite was on average 4.6 \(\pm\) 1.1 wt.% ranging between 3.1 and 6.6 wt.%. In the heavy sub-samples, quartz was on average 39.0 \(\pm\) 1.4 wt.% with values ranging between 37.4 and 41.4 wt.%; orthoclase showed an average abundance of 25.9 \(\pm\) 2.5 wt.% and ranging between 22.3 and 31.0 wt.%% albite was on average 28.7 \(\pm\) 1.9 wt.% ranging between 25.3 and 31.5 wt.%; anorthite was on average 4.6 \(\pm\) 1.1 wt.% ranging between 3.1 and 6.6 wt.%.