Zircon U–Pb dating and sulfide Re–Os isotopes of the Xiarihamu Cu–Ni sulfide deposit in Qinghai Province, Northwestern China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Xiarihamu Cu–Ni sulfide deposit is the second-largest Cu–Ni deposit in China, located in the Eastern Kunlun orogenic belt. However, despite previous study, the formation and evolution of this deposit remains a key unknown in the tectonic evolution of the Eastern Kunlun Orogenic Belt. Moreover, the petrogenesis of the ore-bearing rocks and the nature of ore genesis are the subjects of ongoing debate. Here, we present detailed field observations, petrology, zircon U–Pb geochronology, and Re–Os isotopic analyses to constrain the timing and genesis of the Xiarihamu Cu–Ni sulfide deposit. Sulfides from the massive ores yielded a Re–Os isotopic isochron age of 408 ± 11 Ma. Four samples from the ore-bearing Xiarihamu mafic–ultramafic intrusions yielded zircon U–Pb ages of 423.1 ± 2 Ma, 422.9 ± 3.1 Ma, 422.7 ± 2.3 Ma, and 422.6 ± 2.7 Ma, respectively, indicating that the ore formed during the Silurian. The calculated initial 187Os/188Os ratio and γOs values ranged from 0.5109 to 0.8499 and from 311 to 584, respectively, indicating that crustal contamination played an extremely important role in triggering sulfide saturation. In combination with previous research, drill core observations and Re–Os data provide robust evidence for multiple pulses of magma replenishment throughout the process of ore genesis. Based on this evidence, the large-scale magmatic Cu–Ni mineralization in Xiarihamu likely occurred in a post-collisional setting related to tectonic slab breakoff.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".