MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946487691

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, PARAGENESIS, AND GEOCHRONOLOGY OF THE ARROW URANIUM DEPOSIT, WESTERN ATHABASCA BASIN, SASKATCHEWAN, CANADA: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PATTERSON LAKE CORRIDOR

2019· dissertation· en· W2946487691 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sean Hillacre

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParagenesisGeochronologyGeologyGeochemistryStructural basinUraniumArchaeologyGeomorphologyGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Athabasca Basin in northern Saskatchewan hosts the world’s highest-grade uranium deposits, which are commonly spatially associated with structural zones that have undergone episodes of brittle reactivation, alteration, and polyphase fluid movement. The most recent significant discoveries of uranium mineralization in the Athabasca Basin have been associated with a series of geophysical conductors along a NE-SW-trending structural zone, termed the Patterson Lake corridor, in the southwestern portion of the Basin. The Arrow Deposit, which is along this trend and hosted exclusively in the basement rocks below the Athabasca Supergroup sandstones, has an indicated mineral resource of 179.5 Mlbs U3O8 at a grade of 6.88% U3O8, and is the largest undeveloped uranium resource in the Basin. The present study examines the relationships between the ductile framework and brittle reactivation of deep-seated structures, mineral paragenesis, and radiogenic and stable isotope analyses of uranium mineralization at the Arrow Deposit. Hand sample examination, structural analysis from oriented drill core, thin section microscopy, and electron microprobe analysis has been used to generate a detailed paragenesis of the Arrow Deposit, which was used to select mineralized samples for isotopic analysis that were categorized based on cross-cutting relationships, textures, and chemical composition. Paragenetic information was integrated with structural analysis utilizing over 18,000 measurements of foliation, fractures, veins, shears, mylonites, breccias, cataclasites, fault gouges, and plunge and trend of slickenstriae and ductile lineations. Through this study, the structural system at Arrow has been interpreted as a partitioned, sinistral strike-slip dominated, brittle-ductile fault system of complex Riedel-style geometry. The Arrow system developed along sub-vertical, NE-SW-trending heterogeneous high strain zones (named the A1 through A5 shears) along the limb of a regional-scale fold, and further evolved through episodic reactivation events creating small-scale brittle fault linkages oblique to, and connecting the main fault zone, allowing for migration of fluids, alteration of host rocks, and precipitation of uranium. Uranium mineralization at Arrow occurs as botryoidal, cubic, vein, semi-massive, and massive uraninite (UO2), as well as younger alteration phases including uranium-silicates (e.g. coffinite) and uranyl oxy-hydroxide minerals (e.g. uranophane). Regression of the concentrations of substituting elements including Fe, Si, and Ca give an average chemical age of initial uraninite crystallization of approximately 1,425 Ma. In-situ secondary ionization mass spectrometry (SIMS) U-Pb ages obtained in this study (~700, ~1,200, and ~1,300 Ma) are comparable with those obtained from the Shea Creek area and reveal numerous episodes of uranium mineralization, remobilization, and alteration associated with multi-stage deformation during the Proterozoic. The geochronological data on uranium mineralization and post-mineralization alteration and resetting events broadly correspond to major orogenic events that have affected the North American shield. The oldest uraninites (~1,300 to 1,425 Ma) are botryoidal, cubic, and semi-massive occurrences commonly replacing clay minerals and micas. Younger (~1,200 and ~700 Ma) uraninites occur as cubic crystals, semi-massive and massive lenses, and form the matrix of breccias. The youngest uraniferous minerals are the products of alteration and/or remobilization of uraninite through subsequent fluid-flow events. This study demonstrates that the U–Pb isotope systematics of uranium-rich minerals from the Arrow Deposit have been affected by paleo-fluid-flow events that were controlled by regional and global-scale tectonic events. The precision and high spatial resolution of the SIMS method allowed for measurement of δ18O values from ~10 μm spots on uraninites from the Arrow Deposit. The range of δ18O values (-34.5 to -15.2 ‰) are low, and comparable to those obtained from other unconformity-type deposits in the Basin such as Cigar Lake and Shea Creek. The low δ18O values indicate that the uraninite likely underwent recrystallization via interaction with late, relatively low temperature Athabasca fluids with δ18O values in the range of -20 to -16 ‰. The other discoveries along the Patterson Lake corridor (Triple R, Cannon, Bow, Harpoon, Spitfire) have not been studied in detail, and so this study of the structural context of the Arrow Deposit is important as it emphasizes that protracted reactivation of deep-seated NE-SW-trending structures and their subsidiaries was a fundamental control on uranium mineralization in the SW Athabasca Basin. Continued studies integrating mineral paragenesis, geochemistry, and structural geology with geochronological context will aid in understanding the evolution of uranium deposits within the recently established southwestern Athabasca Basin uranium camp.

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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207