Fluid inclusion and stable isotope constraints on the origin of Wernecke Breccia and associated iron oxide – copper – gold mineralization, Yukon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Iron oxide – Cu ± Au ± U ± Co (IOCG) mineralization is associated with numerous Proterozoic breccia bodies, collectively known as Wernecke Breccia, in Yukon Territory, Canada. Multiphase breccia zones occur in areas underlain by Paleoproterozoic Wernecke Supergroup metasedimentary rocks and are associated with widespread sodic, potassic, and carbonate alteration assemblages. Fluid inclusion data indicate syn-breccia fluids were hot (185–350 °C) saline (24–42 wt.% NaCl equivalent) NaCl–CaCl2–H2O brines. Estimates of fluid pressure vary from 0.4 to 2.4 kbar (1 kbar = 100 MPa). Carbon and oxygen isotopic compositions of breccia-related carbonates range from ~–11‰ to +1.5‰ (Pee Dee belemnite (PDB)) and –2‰ to 20‰ (Vienna standard mean ocean water (V-SMOW); δ18Owater ~–8‰ to +15‰), respectively. δ13C and δ18O values for host Wernecke Supergroup limestone/dolostone vary from ~–2‰ to 1.6‰ and 12‰ to 25‰, respectively. Sulfur isotopic compositions of hydrothermal sulfides and sulfate vary from ~–12‰ to +13‰ and +8‰ to +17‰ (Cañon Diablo Troilite (CDT)), respectively. Syn-breccia biotite, muscovite, and actinolite have δD and δ18O values of ~–141‰ to –18‰ and +7‰ to +12‰ (V-SMOW; δ18Owater ~7‰ to 11‰), respectively. The Wernecke Breccias and the associated IOCG mineralization appear to have formed from largely nonmagmatic fluids — based on isotopic, fluid inclusion, and geological data. The emerging hypothesis is that periodic overpressuring of dominantly formational/metamorphic water led to repeated brecciation and mineral precipitation. The weight of overlying sedimentary rocks led to elevated fluid temperatures and pressures; fluid flow may have been driven by tectonics and (or) gravity with metals scavenged from host strata.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".