MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401628120 · doi:10.5382/econgeo.5094

The Origin of Hyper-Enriched Black Shales and Their Relationship to Hydrocarbon Generation

2024· article· en· W4401628120 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kyle M. Henderson, Anthony E. Williams-Jones, James R. Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueEconomic Geology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyGeochemistryHydrocarbonOil shaleMineralogyMining engineeringPaleontologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Richardson Trough in northern Yukon hosts several occurrences of polymetallic hyper-enriched black shales (HEBS), comprising semimassive sulfide layers with metal concentrations several orders of magnitude above those of average black shales. Models seeking to explain the origin of such spectacular metal concentrations have focused on syndepositional, early diagenetic processes, proposing that the mineralization is entirely prelithification. These models do not provide satisfactory explanations for the mineral textures, paragenesis, and mineral chemistry and thus fail to capture the full story of HEBS formation. We present a new model for HEBS formation that explains mineral textures unaccounted for in previous genetic models. The sulfide fraction in HEBS is dominated by three types of pyrite: Ni-enriched framboidal pyrite (Py1a), euhedral pyrite (Py1b), and an As-enriched anhedral overgrowth (Py2). Two generations of millerite (NiS) have been identified. The first is blebby, disseminated millerite (Mlr1a) and interstitial millerite (Mlr1b), which replaced preexisting features in pyrite. The second millerite generation encases preexisting pyrite and locally replaced sphalerite (Mlr2a). It also forms laths in veinlets with cryptocrystalline quartz and bitumen and in fractures that crosscut bedding-parallel pyritic layers (Mlr2b). Some secondary millerite occurs in sulfide nodules (Mlr2c) containing sphalerite and gersdorffite. Much of the HEBS consists of biogenic quartz, detrital and diagenetic feldspar, and minor illite. The feldspars comprise K-, Ba-, and NH4-rich varieties. Detrital K-feldspar was altered to buddingtonite (Bud) during early diagenesis and to hyalophane (Hya-B) during late diagenesis. Authigenic hyalophane (Hya-A) precipitated concurrently with Hya-B, from pore-fluids in the HEBS matrix, or formed nodules (Hya-C) and veneers (Hya-D) on preexisting sulfides. We propose that the HEBS formed in three stages. Stage 1 involved extensive pyrite precipitation and significant accumulation of metal-rich organic material. Stage 2 coincided with the cessation of pyrite precipitation and the release of nickel and zinc from organic material to precipitate millerite and sphalerite. Stage 3 proceeded via reactions within the oil window that converted clay minerals to authigenic feldspar and released acid, partially dissolving sphalerite. Organic-hosted nickel reacted with sulfur released by sphalerite dissolution to precipitate the second generation of millerite. Our model provides the first explanation for the millerite-sphalerite textures, accounts for the multiple generations of millerite, and explains the various metal enrichments that characterize HEBS. It also demonstrates how diagenetic mineral reactions can strongly influence metal concentrations in black shale.

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 score0.382
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconomic GeologySame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207