Ore genesis of the Mengya'a distal <scp>Pb</scp>–<scp>Zn</scp> deposit in the Lhasa terrane, Tibet, China: Constraints from in situ garnet <scp>U–Pb</scp> dating and <scp>C–H–O–Sr</scp> isotopes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A large amount of distal skarn Pb–Zn deposits without any causative intrusions exposed have been discovered along the eastern Nyainqêntanglha metallogenic belt (NMB) in the Gangdese region, Tibet, China. As a typical distal skarn Pb–Zn deposit in the east of NMB, the Mengya'a deposit is adjacent to the Longmala Pb–Zn ± Cu ± Fe deposit. However, the linkage between these two deposits is not unclear due to the chaotic dating results. In situ Laser Ablation Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (LA‐ICP‐MS) U–Pb dating of reddish‐brown and yellow‐green garnet from Mengya'a yielded lower intersect ages of 53.6 ± 3.1 and 52.4 ± 4.4 Ma, respectively, indicating that Pb–Zn mineralization took place during the main collision stage of the India–Asia plates. The δDSMOW values of garnet, quartz and calcite vary from −148.4‰ to −140.4‰, −123.5‰ to −115.3‰ and −127.9‰ to −121.3‰, with the δ18OH2O values ranging from 5.8‰ to 6.6‰, 0.4‰ to 3.7‰ and 1.0‰ to 1.7‰, respectively. The δ13CV‐PDB and δ18OSMOW values of calcite range from −8.2‰ to −4.7‰ and 9.8‰ to 18.6‰, respectively. These C–H–O isotopic compositions of hydrothermal minerals indicate that the ore‐forming fluids were initially derived from the magmatic water with progressive input of meteoric water from the prograde stage to the retrograde stage. The 87Sr/86Sr(53 Ma) ratios of sphalerite (0.72321–0.73474) are consistent with those of Ando gneiss in the Lhasa‐Golmud area, indicating that the basement gneiss makes a great contribution for the source of ore‐forming materials. The newly obtained garnet U–Pb ages at Mengya'a are consistent with those of mineralization and causative intrusion in the Longmala Pb–Zn ± Fe ± Cu deposit, suggesting that the Mengya'a and Longmala deposits constitute an integrated distal skarn‐type system. This proposed hypothesis suggests that the Fe–Cu ± Pb ± Zn mineralization within the contact zone should focus on the locations beneath the identified Pb–Zn orebodies at Longmala and Pb‐21 orebody at Mengya'a.
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 | 0.001 | 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".