A late Mesozoic Cu mineralizing event in the eastern Central Asian Orogenic Belt, NE China: Implications from geology and geochronology of the newly discovered Zhalageamu deposit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The eastern part of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt in NE China is one of the world’s well-known Ag-Pb-Zn-Mo metallogenic provinces, and the late Mesozoic magmas have been considered to supply dominant metals for mineralization. However, Cu mineralization in this belt is relatively rare. The Zhalageamu deposit is a newly discovered copper deposit in this region and could be applied to address the issue of whether the regional late Mesozoic magmatism could have triggered the formation of large Cu deposits. The quartz diorite and granite porphyry in Zhalageamu returned laser ablation−inductively coupled plasma−mass spectrometric (LA-ICP-MS) zircon U-Pb ages of 267.1 ± 2.0 Ma and 255.6 ± 2.2 Ma, respectively. Molybdenite coexisting with chalcopyrite yielded an isotope dilution−negative−thermal ionization mass spectrometric Re-Os age of 141.8 ± 0.8 Ma. This age is almost identical to that of the coexisting arsenopyrite within the analytical uncertainty, which yielded an Re-Os isochron age of 140.7 ± 5.9 Ma. The above ages constrain the timing of Cu mineralization to the late Mesozoic. The fact that the Cu mineralization is >110 m.y. younger than its igneous host rocks precludes a genetic link between them. Instead, the Cu mineralization age indicates that a possible hidden late Mesozoic intrusion likely contributed Cu mineralization. The age of the Zhalageamu deposit is similar to that of the late Mesozoic magmatic-hydrothermal Ag-Pb-Zn-Fe-Sn mineralizing event (140−120 Ma) in NE China. This suggests that the Zhalageamu Cu mineralization was part of this event and implies the broader existence of a late Mesozoic magmatic-hydrothermal Cu mineralizing event in NE China, a discovery that would be of great significance for further Cu exploration.
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 | 0.000 | 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".