Metal Fingerprints of Eocene Rhyolite Magmas Coincident with Carlin-Type Gold Deposition in Nevada USA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eocene magmatic systems contemporaneous with world-class Carlin-type Au deposits in Nevada (USA) have been proposed by some researchers as a key ingredient for Au mineralization, though evidence conclusively demonstrating their genetic relationship remains tenuous. This study provides the first direct evidence of the pre-eruptive metal budget of volatile- and metal-charged silicic magmas coincident in time (~41 to 34 Ma) and space (within 5 km) with Carlin-type Au deposits. We characterize the pre-eruptive metal fingerprints of these diverse magmatic systems to assess their potential as sources of metals for Carlin-type Au mineralization. Metal abundances from quartz-hosted melt inclusions (Au, Te, Ag, Sb, Tl, Mo, W, Sn, As, Pb, Co, Cu, Ni, and Zn) characterized in situ by SHRIMP-RG and LA-ICP-MS represent our best (and only) estimates for the pre-eruptive metal budget in these systems. Median metal concentrations are generally within one order of magnitude of average upper crust and average continental rhyolite values. But there are two notable exceptions, with median Au contents extending >1 order of magnitude higher than average upper crust and median Cu contents ranging >1 order of magnitude lower than upper crust. Despite this, melts contain lower Au/Cu (<0.1), Au/Ag (<5), and Au/Tl (<0.3) than most ore-grade Carlin-type rock samples and quartz-hosted fluid inclusions, regardless of their age and timing relative to nearby Carlin-type Au mineralization. The metal fingerprints of these magmatic systems, defined both by traditional and multivariate compositional data analysis techniques, are distinct from one another. Yet none are particularly specialized, e.g., high Au/Cu, in terms of being ideal ingredients as postulated by magmatic models for Carlin-type Au mineralization. Magmatic Au contents do not appear to be correlated with rhyolite “flavors” in the way that Cu, Sn, and Nb contents are. Fluid/melt partitioning modeling and magma volume estimates support the idea that a diverse array of non-specialized silicic magmas could feasibly contribute some or potentially all of the Au, Ag, and Cu in Carlin-type systems. The compositional diversity among contemporaneous magmatic systems could possibly contribute to some of the diversity observed across Carlin-type Au districts in Nevada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".