MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2763309768 · doi:10.3749/canmin.1600058

Mineralogical and Geochemical Characteristics Of Sudbury Breccia Adjacent To Footwall Cu-Ni-PGE Sulfide Veins and Structures In the Creighton and Coleman Deposits

2017· article· en· W2763309768 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jonathan O’Callaghan, Robert L. Linnen, Peter C. Lightfoot, G. R. Osinski

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Mineralogist · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrecciaGeologyGeochemistryMineralization (soil science)Metamorphic rockTitaniteHydrothermal circulationSulfideChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Sudbury Breccia is an impactite that formed in the target rocks of the 1850 +1.3/–2.4 Ma Sudbury impact structure in Ontario, Canada. The breccia is interpreted to have formed during crater excavation or modification at the time of the impact event. Copper-Nickel-Platinum Group Elements sulfide melts moved away from contact mineralization at the base of the melt sheet to form veins and stockworks in the footwall. The distribution of both Sudbury Breccia and the later sulfide melts is partially controlled by pre-existing weaknesses in the footwall, such as lithological contacts; as a result, the two are often spatially associated. A combination of early magmatic-hydrothermal and late metamorphic fluids modified the sulfide mineralization to create broad haloes of metalliferous hydrous silicate minerals proximal to the Sudbury Breccia and in the footwall rocks. This study examines variations in the trace-element geochemistry of the breccia-matrix mineral assemblage developed adjacent to footwall mineralization in the North Range (Coleman Mine) and the South Range (Creighton Mine). The Sudbury Breccia is widely considered to have formed in a single event, contemporaneous with the meteorite impact, therefore it provides a relatively consistent baseline for studying subsequent metamorphic and hydrothermal processes, unlike the Archean Superior Province and Paleoproterozoic Southern Province, which experienced pre-impact alteration associated with tectonic and igneous activity. This study focused on examining the textural, chemical, and petrological changes recorded in biotites, amphiboles, chlorites, and Fe-oxides produced by late magmatic and post-magmatic sulfide mineralization and U-Pb age dates of titanite. Titanite-chlorite assemblages in the North Range footwall of the SIC overprint metalliferous assemblages adjacent to the McCreedy East 153 footwall ore body. They yielded an age of 1358 ± 78 Ma, which is interpreted to be associated with the waning effects of the 1450 ± 0.15 Ma Chieflakian orogeny. In the South Range at the Creighton Mine, the Sudbury Breccia hosting the Creighton Deep footwall ore body records a shift from ferro-hornblende to ferro-tschermakite amphibole. When coupled with variations in Ca/Ti in titanite and a U-Pb titanite age of 1616 ± 33 Ma, the assemblage is interpreted to reflect increasing temperature-pressure gradient towards shear zones that were active during the Mazatzalian orogeny, during which time the sulfide mineralization was remobilized. At both locations, biotite exhibits an increase in Tl content that relates to the Ni content of the host rocks and proximity to sulfide mineralization. This relationship may be produced by remobilization of metals during interaction between sulfide mineralization and hydrothermal fluids. Although not directly associated with sulfide emplacement, these signatures provide evidence for a larger geochemical halo around the mineral zone that may provide the basis for ranking the prospectivity of the footwall and possibly vectoring towards mineral zones.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.596
Threshold uncertainty score0.804

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian MineralogistSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207