MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981597713 · doi:10.4095/296550

Major ore types of the Paleoproterozoic Lalor auriferous volcanogenic massive sulphide deposit, Snow Lake, Manitoba

2015· report· en· W2981597713 on OpenAlexaffabout
S Duff, Mark D. Hannington, Antoine Caté, P Mercier-Langevin, I M Kjarsgaard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyGeochemistrySnowMining engineeringGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Lalor deposit is a newly discovered Paleoproterozoic volcanogenic massive sulphide (VMS) deposit located at the east end of the Flin Flon-Snow Lake belt, within the Snow Lake arc assemblage. Lalor is the largest of 11 VMS deposits in the Snow Lake arc assemblage, with combined resources and reserves of 25.3 Mt and average grades of 2.9 g/t Au, 25 g/t Ag, 5 wt% Zn, and 0.79 wt% Cu, including 8.8 Mt at 4.6 g/t Au. Lalor and all other deposits in the Snow Lake arc assemblage have been affected by intense polyphase deformation and amphibolite facies metamorphism. As a result, both the original hydrothermal alteration assemblages and the ore mineral assemblages have been completely recrystallized. However, a variety of different ore types have been preserved, allowing the partial reconstruction of the hydrothermal system, including massive Fe-Zn sulphide lenses, discordant Cu-Au stringer zones, and distinctive precious metal-rich Au- Ag-Pb-Cu zones. The different ore types occur in a series of stratigraphically and structurally mp;lt;"stackedmp;gt;" ore lenses that partly overlap but still largely preserve the original architecture of the deposit. The ore is distributed in 12 discrete lenses or zones of mineralization that are interpreted to be the result of several distinct and overlapping hydrothermal events. Type 1 Fe-Zn massive sulphide ore is the most common ore type in 6 ore lenses and consists of massive coarse-grained pyrite and sphalerite with trace galena in dominantly quartz-muscovite}kyanite-biotite schist (K-alteration association). Type 2 Cu-Au mineralization consists of semi-massive and stockwork chalcopyrite and pyrrhotite in garnetiferous quartzbiotite} staurolite-amphibole-cordierite gneisses (footwall Mg-Fe alteration association). Despite extensive recrystallization and local remobilization, these two ore types are interpreted to represent the (metamorphosed) low- and high-temperature ore assemblages, respectively, of a typical volcanogenic massive sulphide deposit. Type 3 Au-Ag-Pb-Cu-rich ore consists of stringer and disseminated sulphides and sulphosalts mainly hosted in chlorite-carbonate-actinolite schist (Mg-Ca and Ca alteration associations). Galena is an important indicator of Au mineralization and occurs in this ore type as fine-grained blebs in a matrix of chlorite, dolomite, calcite, anthophyllite, Ca-plagioclase, and calc-silicates (epidote, grossular, diopside, Caamphibole } scapolite). Where abundant, the galena is associated with chalcopyrite, pyrite, and pyrrhotite, and with minor to trace sphalerite, Ag-Sb-Pb sulphosalts, electrum, and native gold. Type 4 low-sulphide ore contains ?10 vol% disseminated pyrite in quartz-biotite-anthophyllite gneiss, with minor chlorite, staurolite, and coarse almandine garnet, and has variable Au grades. The sulphides and sulphosalts in ore types 3 and 4 are interpreted to be metamorphically remobilized from pre-existing disseminated mineralization. The hydrothermal system developed during two main episodes of seafloor volcanism. Type 1 massive sulphide in the 10 and 11 lenses and in the 20, 30, 31, and 40 lenses were formed at the paleoseafloor. These lenses are underlain by Type 2 Cu-Au stockwork mineralization (27 Lens) and originally conformable zones of Type 3 Au-Ag-Pb mineralization (21, 24, 25, 26, and 28 lenses). The large Cu-Au stockwork zone (27 Lens) may have been the main feeder of the deposit and is partly continuous with disseminated Au-Ag-Pb- Cu galena-sulphosalts-chalcopyrite mineralization below the 20 Lens. The Au-Ag-Pb-Cu mineralization is thought to have formed in the subseafloor from late-stage, lower temperature hydrothermal fluids (approximately <300°C). In this model, significant Au was introduced first by high-temperature (>300°C) fluids responsible for the Type 2 Cu-Au mineralization and then by lower temperature (possibly boiling) hydrothermal fluids responsible for Type 3 Ag-Au-Pb-Cu mineralization. Although all the ore types are extensively recrystallized and partly remobilized, their distribution strongly supports primary hydrothermal Au enrichment at Lalor. The lead isotopic compositions of the ore galena show no evidence of post-magmatic disturbance, which would be expected if Au had been introduced during deformation and metamorphism (e.g. as in the nearby New Britannia orogenic Au deposit), and the Au-rich assemblages are very similar to those that commonly occur in unmetamorphosed Au-rich volcanogenic massive sulphide deposits.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.239
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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207