MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210346327 · doi:10.2138/am-2022-8142

Trace element and isotopic (S, Pb) constraints on the formation of the giant Chalukou porphyry Mo deposit, NE China

2022· article· en· W4210346327 on OpenAlexafffund
Qingqing Zhao, Degao Zhai, Anthony E. Williams‐Jones, Jiajun Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Mineralogist · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesHigher Education Discipline Innovation ProjectChina Scholarship CouncilChina University of Geosciences, BeijingNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaMcGill University
KeywordsMolybdenitePyriteGeologyGeochemistrySphaleriteSericiteMineralization (soil science)EpidoteTrace elementGalenaChalcopyriteSulfideMineralogyChloriteHydrothermal circulationQuartzFluid inclusionsChemistryCopper

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Porphyry-type Mo deposits have supplied most of the Mo to the world. However, the source of the Mo and the controls on its enrichment in such deposits is still a matter of great debate. In this study, we present in situ trace element and isotopic data for a giant porphyry Mo deposit (the Chalukou Mo deposit in NE China) and use these data to address these issues. Three primary paragenetic stages of mineralization were recognized at Chalukou: (Stage I) K-feldspar + quartz + minor pyrite (Py-I) + minor molybdenite (Mol-I); (Stage II) quartz + sericite + molybdenite (Mol-II) + pyrite (Py-II); (Stage III) quartz + chlorite + epidote + fluorite + pyrite (Py-III) + galena + sphalerite + minor chalcopyrite. The bulk of the molybdenite was deposited in Stage II. In situ S isotope analyses of the sulfide ores show that the δ34S values vary from –5.2 to +7.8‰ (mean = +2.9‰) and correspond to δ34SH2S values from –2.4 to +3.3‰ (mean = +1.1‰). These values are consistent with a magmatic source for the sulfur. In situ Pb isotope compositions of the sulfide ores are almost identical to those of the local Mesozoic granites and other magmatic-hydrothermal ore deposits in this region, suggesting a close genetic association between the Mo mineralization and felsic magmatism. Pyrite from the three stages of mineralization differs significantly in its trace element composition. The first generation, Py-I, has a high Cu content (8.7 ± 49.6 ppm; where the first value is the median and the second is the standard deviation) and Mo content (6.9 ± 3.8 ppm). Pyrite-II has the lowest Cu concentration (1.3 ± 2.1 ppm) and a relatively high Mo concentration (5 ± 128 ppm), and Py-III has a high Cu content (8.7 ± 37.1 ppm) but the lowest Mo content (0.05 ± 5.7 ppm). From this, we infer that pyrite recorded the chemical evolution in the Mo/Cu ratio of the ore fluid and that this ratio reached a maximum in Stage II, coinciding with the widespread saturation of the fluid in molybdenite. The evolution of the Mo/Cu ratio in pyrite implies that the fluid was undersaturated in chalcopyrite at the high temperature of Stage I, despite the Cu concentration of the fluid apparently being at its high level, and chalcopyrite only saturated later, at a lower temperature. Molybdenite, however, because of its lower solubility, saturated early (Stage I) and in the subsequent stage (Stage II) was supersaturated in the fluid. There is a significant enrichment of Mo in the syn-ore intrusions at Chalukou compared to the pre-ore monzogranite. The very low Sr/Y ratios for the Chalukou syn-ore intrusions, which are in sharp contrast to the high Sr/Y ratios of the pre-ore monzogranite and those of porphyries related to Cu deposits, suggest that fractional crystallization of plagioclase may have been a key factor in generating the syn-ore magmas. Molybdenum is a highly incompatible metal and will concentrate in the crust, and assimilation of old continental crust, therefore, may explain the Mo enrichment of the syn-ore intrusions and ultimately the formation of the giant Chalukou deposit.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.421
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican MineralogistSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207