Geology of the Archean Intrusion-Hosted La-Grande-Sud Au-Cu Prospect, La Grande Subprovince, James Bay Region, Quebec(,
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Archean La Grande and Eastmain domains of the La Grande subprovince in the James Bay region of northwestern Quebec are the focus of renewed and extensive exploration as a result of recent major discoveries made in this region (e.g., ~8 Moz Au Roberto deposit). A number of significant Neoarchean Au ± base metal occurrences are present in the La Grande domain, including the La-Grande-Sud Au-Cu prospect (Zone 32, inferred resource of 4.2 million metric tons (Mt) at 2.1 g/t Au and 0.2 wt % Cu). The La-Grande-Sud Au-Cu prospect is hosted in the 2734 ± 2 Ma synvolcanic La-Grande-Sud Tonalite in the 2751 to 2732 Ma Yasinski Group volcanic rocks. The La-Grande-Sud Tonalite is a synvolcanic calc-alkaline intrusion emplaced in an arc-like tectonomagmatic setting. Timing relationships in mineralized zones as well as associated hydrothermal alteration zones support a pre- to early-D 1 origin for at least a part of the mineralization in the La-Grande-Sud Tonalite. Deformation events were responsible for the overprinting of the early mineralization by auriferous shear zone-related systems associated with D 2 . Evidence for a pre-D 2 and pre- to early-D 1 alteration and mineralization system includes: (1) a broadly concentric pattern defined by the hydrothermal alteration assemblages within the La-Grande-Sud Tonalite, which suggests that the hydrothermal alteration was, at least in part, controlled by the geometry of the intrusion rather than by the D 2 deformation; (2) the development of a weak biotite-bearing potassic assemblage (biotite-epidote-plagioclase-muscovite-calcite ± pyrite) that is gradually replaced outward from the center of the intrusion by a chlorite-bearing propylitic assemblage (chlorite-epidote-muscovite-plagioclase-calcite-pyrite), and locally overprinted by a sericitic alteration assemblage (muscovite-quartz-albite-chlorite-pyrite-carbonate), which represents the most intense alteration in the La-Grande-Sud Tonalite; (3) the presence of mineralized hydrothermal breccias along the margins of the intrusion; (4) deformed disseminated and stockwork-style Au-Cu sulfide mineralization consisting of pyrite, chalcopyrite, tennantite, arsenopyrite, pyrrhotite, Bi sulfosalts, and native Au ± Bi in the sericite, chlorite, and biotite facies alteration zones; (5) S 1 -parallel elongated tonalite clasts and sulfide veinlets in D 2 -folded and transposed hydrothermal biotite breccias; and (6) pyrite porphyroblasts that are elongated parallel to the S 1 fabric (syn-D 1 metamorphic recrystallization) and that were folded during D 2 . D 2 was associated with the development of conjugate auriferous extensional quartz-tourmaline veins (orogenic-style veins) that were superimposed on the pre- to early-D 1 intrusion-hosted mineralized system. Gold in these syn- to late-D 2 veins could have been remobilized from preexisting mineralization (disseminated sulfides) or was related to a late (syn-D 2 ) auriferous hydrothermal event. The intrusion-hosted Au mineralization of the La-Grande-Sud Au-Cu prospect illustrates that Archean synvolcanic intrusions, regardless of their size, can host a range of styles of alteration and mineralization, including both “early” and “late” mineralizing systems.
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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".