MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3013664542 · doi:10.1139/cjes-2019-0067

Geology, geochronology, and fluid inclusion studies of the Xiaorequanzi volcanogenic massive sulphide Cu–Zn deposit in the East Tianshan Terrane, China

2020· article· en· W3013664542 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xiheng He, Xiao‐Hua Deng, Leon Bagas, Jing Zhang, Chao Li, Wendong Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsGeologyGeochemistryFluid inclusionsSphaleriteOverprintingTerranePyriteChalcopyriteQuartzInclusion (mineral)Hydrothermal circulationMolybdeniteGalenaMineralogyMetamorphic rockCopperPaleontologyTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Xiaorequanzi Cu–Zn deposit is in the westernmost part of East Tianshan Terrane in northwestern China. The deposit is unique in the region being a volcanogenic massive sulphide (VMS) deposit located near a zone (or belt) containing giant late Paleozoic porphyry Cu deposits. Aiming to better understand the genesis of the mineral deposits in the terrane and their tectonic setting, we report our findings of detailed studies on fluid inclusion microthermometry, Re–Os dating of chalcopyrite from the massive ore, and U–Pb dating of zircons from the host volcanic rocks. There are two sulphide stages with early pyrite succeeded by chalcopyrite–sphalerite, which are hydrothermally overprinted and supergene enriched. The hydrothermal overprinting is characterised by quartz–sulphide veins crossed by carbonate-rich quartz veins. Quartz from the chalcopyrite–sphalerite stage is characterised by primary fluid inclusions containing H2O–NaCl(–CO2) and homogenise at 228–392 °C with a salinity of 2.2–13.3 wt.% NaCl equiv. Secondary fluid inclusions related to the hydrothermal overprinting homogenise at 170–205 °C with a salinity of 2.7–12.1 wt.% NaCl equiv. Fluid inclusions in the quartz–sulphide stage of the hydrothermal overprinting contain H2O–NaCl with homogenisation temperatures of 164–281 °C and salinities in ranging from 2.9 to 12.4 wt.% NaCl equiv. Fluid inclusion in the quartz–calcite stage contain H2O–NaCl with homogenisation temperatures of 122–204 °C with salinities of 1.4–12.4 wt.% NaCl equiv. These characteristics are like those of the secondary fluid inclusions in the VMS mineralisation. Combining these findings with H–O isotopic data from previous studies, we propose that the primary mineralising fluid is magmatic in origin. Tuff hosting the mineralisation yields a SHRIMP U–Pb zircon age of 352 ± 5 Ma, which is interpreted as the age of the tuff, and a porphyritic felsite dyke intruding the tuff yields a SHRIMP U–Pb zircon date of 345 ± 6 Ma, interpreted as the emplacement age of the dyke. Chalcopyrite from the main orebody at Xiaorequanzi yields a Re–Os isochron age of 336 ± 13 Ma with an initial 187Os/188Os ratio of 0.25 ± 0.55 (MSWD = 12). Given that the VMS deposit is a syngenetic deposit, we regard the upper ca. 349 Ma limit of the Re–Os date as the approximate age of the chalcopyrite. The three dates are the same within error, and the upper limit of the Re–Os date of ca. 349 is taken as the age of the volcanic, dyke, and mineralisation. The volcanic rocks around the Xiaorequanzi deposit have been previously classified as calc–alkaline to high-K calc–alkaline enriched in large-ion lithophile elements and depleted in high-field-strength elements, which are characteristics indicative of a forearc setting. It is suggested that VMS mineralisation formed in a forearc setting related to the north-directed subduction of the Palaeo-Kangguer or North Tianshan oceanic plates.

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 score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences→Same topicGeological and Geochemical Analysis→French-language works237,207→