Tonalite-Dominated Magmatism in the Abitibi Subprovince, Canada, and Significance for Cu-Au Magmatic-Hydrothermal Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Archean greenstone belts, magmatism is dominated by intrusive and volcanic rocks with tholeiitic affinities, as well as tonalite- and granodiorite-dominated large-volume batholiths, i.e., tonalite–trondhjemite–granodiorite (TTG) suites. These intrusions are associated with poorly documented mineralization (Cu-Au porphyries) that, in the Neoarchean Abitibi Subprovince (>2.79 to ~2.65 Ga), Superior Province, Canada, are associated with diorite bearing plutons, i.e., tonalite–trondhjemite–diorite (TTD) suites. The importance of TTG versus TTD suites in the evolution of greenstone belts and of their magmatic-hydrothermal systems and related mineralization is unconstrained. The aim of this study was to portray the chemistry and distribution of these suites in the Abitibi Subprovince. The study used data compiled by the geological surveys of Québec and Ontario to evaluate the chemistry of TTG and TTD suites and uncovered two coeval magmas that significantly differentiated (fractional crystallization mostly): 1) a heavy rare earth elements (HREE)-depleted tonalitic magma from high pressure melting of an hydrated basalt source; and 2) a hybrid HREE-undepleted magma that may be a mixture of mantle-derived (tholeiite) and tonalitic melts. The HREE-depleted rocks (mostly tonalite and granodiorite) display chemical characteristics of TTG suites (HREE, Ti, Nb, Ta, Y, and Sr depletion, lack of mafic unit, Na-rich), while the other rocks (tonalite and diorite) formed TTD suites. Tonalite-dominated magmatism, in the Abitibi Subprovince, comprises crustal melts as well as a significant proportion of mantle-derived magmas and this may be essential for Cu-Au magmatic-hydrothermal 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".