Ore mineralogy, pyrite chemistry, and S isotope systematics of magmatic-hydrothermal Au mineralization associated with the Mooshla Intrusive Complex (MIC), Doyon-Bousquet-LaRonde mining camp, Abitibi greenstone belt, Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Mooshla Intrusive Complex (MIC) is an Archean polyphase magmatic body located in the Doyon-Bousquet-LaRonde (DBL) mining camp of the Abitibi greenstone belt, Québec. The MIC is spatially associated with numerous gold (Au)-rich VMS, epizonal 'intrusion-related' Au-Cu vein systems, and shear zone-hosted (orogenic?) Au deposits. To elucidate genetic links between deposits and the MIC, mineralized samples from two of the epizonal 'intrusion-related' Au-Cu vein systems (Doyon and Grand Duc Au-Cu) have been characterized using a variety of analytical techniques. Preliminary results indicate gold (as electrum) from both deposits occurs relatively late in the systems as it is primarily observed along fractures in pyrite and gangue minerals. At Grand Duc gold appears to have formed syn- to post-crystallization relative to base metal sulphides (e.g. chalcopyrite, sphalerite, pyrrhotite), whereas base metal sulphides at Doyon are relatively rare. The accessory ore mineral assemblage at Doyon is relatively simple compared to Grand Duc, consisting of petzite (Ag3AuTe2), calaverite (AuTe2), and hessite (Ag2Te), while accessory ore minerals at Grand Duc are comprised of tellurobismuthite (Bi2Te3), volynskite (AgBiTe2), native Te, tsumoite (BiTe) or tetradymite (Bi2Te2S), altaite (PbTe), petzite, calaverite, and hessite. Pyrite trace element distribution maps from representative pyrite grains from Doyon and Grand Duc were collected and confirm petrographic observations that Au occurs relatively late. Pyrite from Doyon appears to have been initially trace-element poor, then became enriched in As, followed by the ore metal stage consisting of Au-Ag-Te-Bi-Pb-Cu enrichment and lastly a Co-Ni-Se(?) stage enrichment. Grand Duc pyrite is more complex with initial enrichments in Co-Se-As (Stage 1) followed by an increase in As-Co(?) concentrations (Stage 2). The ore metal stage (Stage 3) is indicated by another increase in As coupled with Au-Ag-Bi-Te-Sb-Pb-Ni-Cu-Zn-Sn-Cd-In enrichment. The final stage of pyrite growth (Stage 4) is represented by the same element assemblage as Stage 3 but at lower concentrations. Preliminary sulphur isotope data from Grand Duc indicates pyrite, pyrrhotite, and chalcopyrite all have similar delta-34S values (~1.5 ± 1 permille) with no core-to-rim variations. Pyrite from Doyon has slightly higher delta-34S values (~2.5 ± 1 permille) compared to Grand Duc but similarly does not show much core-to-rim variation. At Grand Duc, the occurrence of Au concentrating along the rim of pyrite grains and associated with an enrichment in As and other metals (Sb-Ag-Bi-Te) shares similarities with porphyry and epithermal deposits, and the overall metal association of Au with Te and Bi is a hallmark of other intrusion-related gold systems. The occurrence of the ore metal-rich rims on pyrite from Grand Duc could be related to fluid boiling which results in the destabilization of gold-bearing aqueous complexes. Pyrite from Doyon does not show this inferred boiling texture but shares characteristics of dissolution-reprecipitation processes, where metals in the pyrite lattice are dissolved and then reconcentrated into discrete mineral phases that commonly precipitate in voids and fractures created during pyrite dissolution.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".