共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 140 毫秒
1.
兴蒙造山带成矿规律及若干科学问题 总被引：3，自引：0，他引：3
兴蒙造山带位于中亚造山带东段,形成于古生代,在中生代遭受了西北部蒙古-鄂霍茨克洋构造域和东部古太平洋构造域的强烈改造。该造山带也是中国北方地区一个重要的金属成矿带,因此对该造山带成矿规律的总结和研究,无论是在理论上还是在找矿勘查实践中都具有十分重要的意义。笔者对该地区的研究成果进行了收集和整理。根据已有的年代学数据,该区已发现的绝大多数矿床形成于侏罗纪—白垩纪,与古生代古亚洲洋构造体系关系不大。根据兴蒙造山带内的成矿与不同构造体系演化之间的关系,将研究区内的矿床分为4类:(1)与古亚洲洋构造体系有关的矿床,形成于500~210 Ma,矿床类型主要是斑岩型Cu-Mo、Mo和Au矿床、浅成低温热液型Au矿床和矽卡岩型Pb-Zn矿床,矿床形成环境主要为岛弧及古亚洲洋闭合后的碰撞与伸展阶段;(2)与蒙古-鄂霍茨克洋构造体系有关的矿床,形成时间240~110 Ma,矿床类型主要是斑岩型Cu-Mo和Mo多金属矿床、浅成低温热液型Au矿床、中低温热液脉型Pb-Zn-Ag矿床和热液脉型Ag多金属矿床,形成环境主要为陆缘弧、蒙古-鄂霍茨克洋闭合后的碰撞造山-后碰撞,以及造山后的伸展崩塌阶段;(3)与古太平洋构造体系有关的矿床,成矿作用发生于210~100 Ma,矿床类型主要有斑岩型Mo(W、Cu)矿床、矽卡岩型多金属矿床和浅成低温热液型Au矿床,形成于与古太平洋板块俯冲有关的活动大陆边缘环境;(4)与蒙古-鄂霍茨克洋和古太平洋构造体系叠加有关的矿床,矿床主要形成于150~120 Ma,矿床类型主要有斑岩型Mo(Cu、W)矿床、热液脉型Pb-Zn-Ag和Cu多金属矿床、高温岩浆热液型稀有稀土元素、W(Sn)、Sn矿床和矽卡岩型Fe多金属矿床,矿床形成环境处于蒙古-鄂霍茨克洋和古太平洋这两大构造体系的叠加区域,总体属于一个伸展的构造背景。不同构造体系下的成矿特点是不同的,而所富集的主要金属元素也有差别。根据所产出的不同金属的资源量大小对比,Cu主要产在与古亚洲洋构造体系和蒙古-鄂霍茨克洋构造体系,Mo主要产在蒙古-鄂霍茨克洋构造体系和古太平洋构造体系,Pb-Zn主要产在蒙古-鄂霍茨克洋和古太平洋构造体系叠加区和古亚洲洋构造体系,Au主要产在古太平洋构造体系,Ag和Sn主要产在蒙古-鄂霍茨克洋和古太平洋构造体系叠加区,W主要产在蒙古-鄂霍茨克洋和古太平洋构造体系叠加区域和古太平洋构造体系。 相似文献
2.
中亚成矿域斑岩大规模成矿特征：大地构造背景、流体作用与成矿深部动力学机制 总被引：4，自引：0，他引：4
中亚成矿域夹持于西伯利亚、东欧和塔里木-华北克拉通之间,展布范围与全球显生宙大陆地壳生长最典型的增生型造山带——中亚造山带相当,并产出一系列大型—超大型斑岩铜(-金)、斑岩钼及斑岩铜(-钼)矿床。斑岩成矿作用自西向东存在明显差异,可高度概括为具‘西铜东钼、早铜晚钼’特征。基于前寒武纪基底性质、成矿大地构造背景以及斑岩成矿特征方面的系统综合研究,以重要构造线为界,将成矿域进一步划分为三个成矿省:哈萨克斯坦斑岩Cu(-Au-Mo)、蒙古斑岩Cu(-Au)和中国东北斑岩Mo(-Cu)成矿省。哈萨克斯坦成矿省具新太古—古元古代结晶基底;四个大型斑岩Cu矿床形成于早古生代增生造山过程(481~440Ma),而绝大多数矿床为晚石炭世(330~295Ma)集中爆发成矿的产物。古亚洲洋西段,沿我国中天山—伊犁南缘—吉尔吉斯北天山—中哈萨克斯坦—科克切塔夫至成吉思线性展布的古生代岩浆弧与哈萨克斯坦山弯构造共同制约了斑岩成矿作用;增生造山向山弯构造的转换阶段为斑岩集中成矿期。蒙古斑岩成矿省亦具新太古代—早古元古代结晶基底;斑岩成矿作用主要发生在泥盆纪(~370Ma)和三叠纪(~240Ma)两个时期,为图瓦-蒙古山弯构造演化过程中两个局部时段的突发成矿;早期成矿事件与古亚洲洋体系向南戈壁微地块下的俯冲增生造山有关,晚期成矿可能是蒙古—鄂霍茨克洋俯冲作用的结果。中国东北斑岩成矿省广泛发育新元古代结晶基底和泛非事件岩石学记录;奥陶纪(482~440Ma)斑岩成矿受控于古亚洲洋早古生代时期俯冲增生作用;而中生代斑岩钼集中爆发成矿则分别受控于古亚洲洋体系后碰撞(~250Ma)、蒙古—鄂霍茨克洋体系同俯冲(248~204Ma)、古太平洋体系同俯冲(195~145Ma)及中国东部岩石圈减薄事件(145~106Ma)不同地球动力学体制。成矿流体方面总体而论,中亚斑岩型矿床热液蚀变遵循经典Lowell and Guibert模式,高氧化性岩浆流体有效出溶造就了大型-超大型斑岩矿床。中亚成矿域斑岩铜矿的成矿斑岩岩石类型与环太平洋域成矿斑岩类似,以钙碱性和高钾钙碱性成分为主,最常见的是石英二长闪长岩、二长花岗岩、花岗闪长岩和花岗岩。成钼矿斑岩比成铜(-金-钼)斑岩更偏酸性,具更高SiO2含量。部分斑岩具埃达克质岩微量元素地球化学特征,另一部分斑岩却有类似正常弧火山岩的特征。虽然现有弧环境斑岩岩浆产生的‘MASH’和‘板片熔融’模型以及‘后碰撞拆沉与新生基性下地壳熔融’模型能够解释中亚成矿域部分斑岩铜矿床成矿的深部机制,但本文新提出‘残余洋中脊俯冲+预富集基性下地壳熔融’模型解释哈萨克斯坦成矿省巴尔喀什—西准噶尔成矿带斑岩铜大规模成矿的深部机制。中亚域斑岩钼成矿与古老地壳或古老岩石圈地幔的熔融无关,而与新生地壳熔融产生长英质岩浆的深部事件存在直接成因联系。西段哈萨克斯坦省新生地壳由古生代古亚洲洋演化过程中弧增生事件形成,而东段中国东北成矿省新生地壳则是新元古代与Rodinia超大陆相关聚合和裂解事件造就的。"新生下地壳部分熔融成钼"模型突破了钼成矿与古老地壳熔融有关的传统认识,能很好地解释全球最大的中国东北钼成矿省的成矿深部动力学机制。 相似文献
3.
蒙古-鄂霍茨克成矿带中段金矿床地质特征及构造背景 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
蒙古—鄂霍茨克成矿带是重要的金、稀有元素成矿带。作者将我国境内大兴安岭北部上黑龙江盆地和额尔古纳隆起区的砂宝斯金矿、小伊诺盖沟金矿等与俄罗斯赤塔州的达拉松、克留切夫等典型矿床进行了对比研究，以探讨该成矿带内金矿床的成因和形成的构造背景。研究表明，上述矿床均受蒙古—鄂霍茨克缝合带控制，矿床形成于西伯利亚地台与蒙古—华北陆块碰撞造山环境；我国上黑龙江盆地区与俄罗斯东后贝加尔地区同属蒙古—鄂霍茨克成矿带中段，以中温热液矿床为主，矿床类型主要为造山型金矿床。 相似文献
4.
内蒙古敖仑花钼矿床地质特征、含矿斑岩地球化学及锆石Hf同位素研究 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
位于大兴安岭南段的敖仑花钼矿是新发现的斑岩型矿床,大地构造位置属于蒙古-兴安褶皱带的东部,靠近大兴安岭主脊断裂位置.区域为古亚洲洋构造域和滨西太平洋构造域的交汇部位,经历了复杂的构造-岩浆演化,使其成为铜、锡、铅、锌、钼等多金属成矿的集中地. 相似文献
5.
《吉林大学学报(地球科学版)》2015,(Z1)
<正>大兴安岭中-南段是由众多微地块(额尔古纳地块、兴安地块和松嫩地块)伴随着古亚洲洋的消减闭合,于晚石炭世拼贴所形成的统一地块(本文将该统一地块称之为"内蒙地块群")。该区域大地构造属性上归属于中亚造山带东段(兴蒙造山带),是华北板块与西伯利亚板块碰撞拼合的部位。在构造演化方面,该区域形成于古生代古亚洲洋构造体制,又经历了中生代以来鄂霍茨克构造体制和古太平洋构造体制的构造叠合,产生了"三种体制,两次叠合"的复杂过程,故成为地学界研究古亚洲洋构造域、鄂霍茨克构造域 相似文献
6.
中亚造山带东段位于西伯利亚和华北克拉通之间，经历了多构造体系叠加和多旋回洋陆转换的复杂演化过程，目前大量研究均以构造带为核心来限定区域构造格局，但一直争议较大。本文以构造单元的构造属性及其形成过程为主线，结合区域构造带演化，重新厘定了中国东北地区基本构造格局，建立了中国东北山弯构造演化模型。研究表明，古生代时期中国东北地区的主要构造单元由两个具前寒武纪基底的古老地块——额尔古纳地块和佳木斯地块及其张广才岭陆缘弧与两个古生代增生地体——兴安增生地体和松辽增生地体组成，其间由古亚洲洋分支新林- 喜桂图洋、贺根山- 嫩江洋、龙凤山洋和索伦洋分割。早古生代，西部额尔古纳地块东南部为西太平洋型活动陆缘，发育有嘎仙- 吉峰- 环宇洋内弧和头道桥等洋岛，~500 Ma随着新林- 喜桂图洋的关闭，这些洋内弧和洋岛拼贴增生至额尔古纳地块东南缘。随后贺根山- 嫩江洋的俯冲和后撤形成了一系列沟- 弧- 盆体系，持续的俯冲导致弧陆碰撞和陆缘增生，形成兴安增生地体的主体。同时，东部佳木斯地块西侧发育有龙凤山洋的安第斯型俯冲活动陆缘，形成了张广才岭陆缘弧。伴随着各大洋的俯冲和陆缘增生，额尔古纳地块和佳木斯地块以及它们的陆缘增生带构成了一个早古生代近东西向展布的地块链。南部以锡林浩特- 龙江微地块为核心发生陆缘俯冲，形成松辽增生地体雏形。索伦洋发生双向俯冲，并通过弧陆碰撞产生陆缘增生。晚古生代，伴随着古亚洲洋的北向俯冲和后撤，早期形成的地块链逐渐发生向南弯曲。二叠纪末期—中三叠世古亚洲洋俯冲消减闭合以及西北部蒙古- 鄂霍茨克洋和东部泛大洋的俯冲挤压，导致地块链进一步弯曲，同时，早期的古老地块、增生地体、弧岩浆岩、沉积建造等发生汇聚，最终形成一个以额尔古纳地块和兴安增生地体为西翼，佳木斯地块和张广才岭陆缘弧为东翼，松辽增生地体为核心的大规模山弯构造——中国东北山弯构造。 相似文献
7.
中国东北中生代构造体制与区域成矿背景: 来自中生代火山岩组合时空变化的制约 总被引：87，自引：29，他引：58
本文系统总结了东北地区中生代火山岩的年代学、岩石组合及其时空分布规律,以便对环太平洋构造体系和蒙古——鄂霍茨克构造体系中生代的演化历史及其东北地区中生代区域成矿背景给出制约。基于火山岩中锆石U——Pb定年结果,东北地区中生代火山作用可划分成六期:晚三叠世(200～228Ma)、早——中侏罗世(173～190Ma)、中——晚侏罗世(158～166Ma)、早白垩世早期(138～145Ma)、早白垩世晚期(106～133Ma)和晚白垩世(88～97Ma)。晚三叠世火山作用主要分布在吉黑东部和小兴安岭——张广才岭地区,前者为A型流纹岩,后者为双峰式火山岩组合,它们共同揭示了古亚洲洋最终闭合后的伸展环境;早——中侏罗世火山岩主要分布在吉黑东部、小兴安岭——张广才岭和额尔古纳地区,吉黑东部和额尔古纳地区早——中侏罗世钙碱性火山岩的存在分别标志着古太平洋板块和蒙古——鄂霍茨克洋板块俯冲作用的发生,而小兴安岭——张广才岭早——中侏罗世火山岩则以双峰式火成岩组合为特征,反映了双向俯冲的弧后伸展环境;中——晚侏罗世和早白垩世早期火山岩主要分布在松辽盆地以西和冀北——辽西地区,前者为碱性——亚碱性的过渡系列,主要由玄武粗安岩、粗安岩和少量粗面岩组成,后者为A型流纹岩或碱性流纹岩组成,这些火山岩形成于加厚陆壳的坍塌或拆沉阶段;早白垩世晚期火山岩广泛分布于东北地区,吉黑东部为钙碱性火山岩组合,而松辽盆地和大兴安岭地区则主要为双峰式火山岩组合,前者标志着古太平洋板块的俯冲,后者与早期加厚陆壳的拆沉和/或类似弧后的伸展环境有关;晚白垩世火山岩主要分布在吉黑东部和陆内,前者为钙碱性火山岩组合,后者为碱性玄武岩,反映了来自东部环太平洋构造体系的俯冲作用。综合上述中生代火山岩的岩石组合及时空分布特征,可以判定:1)环太平洋构造体系对东亚大陆下的俯冲始于早侏罗世,中生代期间存在早侏罗世、早白垩世晚期和晚白垩世三次俯冲事件,其影响的空间范围主要在松辽盆地及其以东地区,陆缘和古俯冲带是寻找斑岩型矿床的有利场所,而陆内的伸展区域主要与浅成低温热液矿床有关;2)蒙古——鄂霍茨克构造体系经历了中生代早期的俯冲事件和中侏罗世及早白垩世早期两次陆内推覆事件,其影响的空间范围主要在松辽盆地以西地区和华北地块北缘,中生代早期的俯冲事件主要与活动陆缘背景下的斑岩型矿床关系密切,而晚侏罗世和早白垩世两次与加厚陆壳拆沉有关的伸展背景有利于多金属矿床的形成。 相似文献
8.
中生代复杂构造体系的成矿过程与成矿作用——以华北大陆北缘西拉木伦钼铜多金属成矿带为例 总被引：20，自引：7，他引：13
西拉木伦钼铜多金属成矿带处于华北克拉通与中亚造山带的过渡区,是古生代古亚洲构造域与中生代西太平洋构造域的交汇部位。在中生代受多种构造体系的制约,如中亚造山带造山后期局部伸展、蒙古-鄂霍茨克俯冲-碰撞造山作用、古太平洋板块的向西俯冲和中国东部岩石圈减薄事件的影响等。西拉木伦成矿带成矿斑岩锆石U-Pb年龄和辉钼矿Re-Os同位素年龄资料显示,钼铜矿成岩成矿主要集中在260～220Ma、180～150Ma和140～120Ma三个时期。结合华北克拉通北缘构造演化历史,推测这三期成矿作用主要与造山后局部伸展、构造体系转折和陆内伸展(岩石圈减薄)过程有关,并相应建立了"车户沟式"、"鸡冠山式"和"敖伦花式"三类斑岩钼铜矿床成矿模式。进一步研究表明,岩石的酸碱性、岩浆来源、岩浆的氧逸度、岩浆演化方式、构造背景等因素,制约了成矿作用的专属性。 相似文献
9.
10.
为探讨蒙古-鄂霍茨克洋演化有关的金属成矿问题,对蒙古国东部哈拉特乌拉Fe?Zn矿床花岗闪长斑岩和查希尔Fe?Mo矿床黑云母二长花岗岩开展了锆石U?Pb年代学、岩石地球化学和Hf同位素组成研究.成矿岩体的年龄分别为278 Ma和258 Ma,均富钾、碱,富集轻稀土元素和大离子亲石元素（K、Rb）,亏损高场强元素（Nb、Ta、Ti）,属高钾钙碱性I型花岗岩. 锆石εHf（t）值分别为6.6~9.8和6.9~11.1,Hf两阶段模式年龄分别为672~877 Ma和568~855 Ma,表明岩体母岩浆源于新元古代亏损地幔形成的新生地壳的部分熔融. 哈拉特乌拉和查希尔矽卡岩型铁多金属矿床成矿岩体应是蒙古-鄂霍茨克洋板块南东向俯冲的产物,间接证明了蒙古-鄂霍茨克洋板块开始向南东俯冲的时间应早于278 Ma. 相似文献
11.
The Xiaoxinancha Au–Cu deposit is located at the eastern segment of the Tianshan–Xingmeng orogenic belt in northeast China. The deposit includes porphyry Au–Cu orebodies, veined Au–Cu orebodies and veined Mo mineralizations. All of them occur within the diorite intrusion. The Late Permian diorite, Late Triassic granodiorite, Early Cretaceous granite and granite porphyry are developed in the ore area. The studies on geological features show that the porphyry Au–Cu mineralization is related to the Late Permian diorite intrusion. New geochronologic data for the Xiaoxinancha porphyry Au–Cu deposit yield Permian crystallization zircon U–Pb age of 257 ± 3 Ma for the diorite that hosts the Au–Cu mineralization. Six molybdenite samples from quartz + molybdenite veins imposed on the porphyry Au–Cu orebodies yield an isochron age of 110.3 ± 1.5 Ma. The ages of the molybdenites coeval to zircon ages of the granite within the errors suggest that the Mo mineralization was genetically related to the Early Cretaceous granite intrusion. The formation of the diorite and the related Au–Cu mineralization were caused by the partial melting of the subduction slab during the Late Palaeozoic palaeo‐Asia Ocean tectonic stage. The Re contents and Re–Os isotopic data indicate that the crustal resource is dominated for the Mo mineralization during the Cretaceous extensional setting caused by the roll‐back of the palaeo‐Pacific plate. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 相似文献
12.
《International Geology Review》2012,54(16):1843-1869
Numerous molybdenum (Mo) ore deposits have been discovered in the East Xingmeng orogenic belt (East Central Asian orogenic belt), over the past 10 years, and this region is becoming one of the world's most important Mo production areas. It contains 6.18 Mt of proven Mo metal reserves, which accounts for 30% of the total proven Chinese Mo reserves. The ore district includes 37 deposits and 15 occurrences, with three major Mo ore types, that is porphyries, skarns, and hydrothermal veins. The latter can be subdivided into quartz- and volcanic hydrothermal-vein types. With the exception of the Ordovician Duobaoshan porphyry Cu–Mo deposit (477 Ma), all the East Xingmeng Mo deposits formed during the Mesozoic. Re–Os dating of molybdenite has documented three episodes of Mo mineralization: Early Triassic (248–242 Ma), Jurassic (178–146 Ma), and Early Cretaceous (142–131 Ma). Early Triassic Mo deposits are distributed along the northern margin fault of the North China Craton (NCC) and include porphyry and quartz vein types. They are characterized by the association of Mo + Cu. Jurassic Mo deposits are mainly distributed in the eastern area and include porphyry, quartz vein, and skarn types. They are typified by Mo alone and/or the association of Mo, Pb, and Zn. Cretaceous Mo deposits are distributed in all areas and include porphyry and volcanic hydrothermal vein types. Similar to the Jurassic ores, they are simple Mo or Mo + Pb + Zn deposits. Volcanic hydrothermal vein deposits are characterized by an association of molybdenum and uranium. The Triassic Mo deposits formed in a syn-collision setting between the Siberian and North China plates. The Jurassic Mo deposits formed in a compressional setting, which was probably triggered by the westward subduction of the palaeo-Pacific plate. The Early Cretaceous Mo deposits are linked to a tectonic regime of lithosphere thinning, which was caused by delamination of thickened lithosphere. However, the Mo deposits in the Erguna terrane of the northwest Xingmeng orogenic belt may be related to the evolution of the Okhotsk Ocean. 相似文献
13.
南秦岭山阳-柞水矿集区构造-岩浆-成矿作用 总被引：9，自引：2，他引：7
山阳-柞水矿集区是南秦岭成矿带主要矿集区之一。从新元古代到晚侏罗世-早白垩世,山阳-柞水地区经历了洋壳俯冲和陆陆碰撞的构造演化,在演化的不同阶段形成了不同矿化类型、矿化组合的Cu、PbZn、Ag、Fe、Mo、Au矿床。新元古代时期,由于洋壳的俯冲作用,山阳-柞水地区形成了与基性岩有关的钛磁铁矿;泥盆纪-二叠纪时期,古秦岭洋消减形成山阳-柞水弧前盆地的同时,也形成一系列沉积型Fe、Ag、PbZn矿床;三叠纪时期,华北、扬子板块全面碰撞并形成了与碰撞作用密切相关的晚三叠世斑岩型Mo矿和造山型Au矿;晚侏罗世-早白垩世时期,则形成了碰撞后伸展环境下的矽卡岩-斑岩型CuMo-Au矿床。山阳-柞水矿集区内的各种时代和类型的矿床是秦岭造山带不同阶段的构造-岩浆活动的产物,对真实、客观的理解秦岭地区的构造演化具有重要意义。 相似文献
14.
熊耳山—外方山矿集区位于秦岭造山带之华北板块南缘,经历了复杂的碰撞造山过程,成矿时间跨度大,成矿强度高,成矿作用多样。复合造山过程和相应的成矿作用已被深入研究,但成矿系统的划分和叠加成矿作用尚需研究。本文将熊耳山—外方山矿集区发育的Au-Mo矿床划分为造山型Mo矿床、斑岩型Mo矿床、岩浆热液脉型Mo矿床、造山型Au矿床和岩浆热液型Au矿床5个类型,对应5种成矿系统：(1)造山型Mo矿床形成于250~227 Ma的同碰撞环境和227~194 Ma的后碰撞环境,为变质热液萃取壳源Mo成矿;(2)斑岩型Mo矿床形成于163~135 Ma的洋陆俯冲环境和135~116 Ma的岩石圈减薄环境,为岩浆热液携带幔源或壳源Mo成矿;(3)岩浆热液脉型Mo矿床形成于227~194 Ma的后碰撞环境,为岩浆热液携带幔源Mo成矿;(4)造山型Au矿床在三叠纪发生了预富集作用,主要形成于163~135 Ma的洋陆俯冲环境和135~103 Ma的岩石圈减薄环境,为变质热液萃取壳源Au成矿;(5)岩浆热液型Au矿床仅形成于135~103 Ma的岩石圈减薄环境,为岩浆热液携带壳源Au成矿。矿集区主要存在两种叠加成矿作用,即不同构造背景下多种成矿系统的叠加和同一构造背景下不同成矿系统的叠加。 相似文献
15.
Duobaoshan is the largest porphyry-related Cu-Mo-Au orefield in northeastern(NE)Asia,and hosts a number of large-medium porphyry Cu(PCDs),epithermal Au and Fe-Cu skarn deposits.Formation ages of these deposits,from the oldest(Ordovician)to youngest(Jurassic),have spanned across over 300 Ma.No similar orefields of such size and geological complexity are found in NE Asia,which reflects its metallogenic uniqueness in forming and preserving porphyry-related deposits.In this study,we explore the actual number and timing of magmatic/mineralization phases,their respective magma genesis,fertility,and regional tectonic connection,together with the preservation of PCDs.We present new data on the magmatic/mineralization ages(LA-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb,pyrite and molybdenite Re-Os dating),whole-rock geochemistry,and zircon trace element compositions on four representative deposits in the Duobaoshan orefield,i.e.,Duobaoshan PCD,Tongshan PCD,Sankuanggou Fe-Cu skarn,and Zhengguang epithermal Au deposits,and compiled published ones from these and other mineral occurrences in the orefield.In terms of geochronology,we have newly summarized seven magmatic phases in the orefield:(1)Middle-Late Cambrian(506-491 Ma),(2)Early and Middle Ordovician(485-471 Ma and~462 Ma),(3)Late Ordovician(450-447 Ma),(4)Early Carboniferous and Late-Carboniferous to Early Permian(351-345 and 323-291 Ma),(5)Middle-Late Triassic(244-223 Ma),(6)Early-Middle and Late Jurassic(178-168 Ma and~150 Ma),and(7)Early Cretaceous(~112 Ma).Three of these seven major magmatic phases were coeval with ore formation,including(1)Early Ordovician(485-473 Ma)porphyry-type Cu-Mo-(Au),(2)Early-Middle Triassic(246-229 Ma)porphyry-related epithermal Au-(Cu-Mo),and(3)Early Jurassic(177-173 Ma)Fe-Cu skarn mineralization.Some deposits in the orefield,notably Tongshan and Zhengguang,were likely formed by more than one mineralization events.In terms of geochemistry,ore-causative granitoids in the orefield exhibit adakite-like or adakite-normal arc transitional signatures,but those forming the porphyry-/epithermal-type Cu-Mo-Au mineralization are largely confined to the former.The varying but high Sr/Y,Sm/Yb and La/Yb ratios suggest that the ore-forming magmas were mainly crustal sourced and formed at different depths(clinopyroxene-/amphibole-/garnet-stability fields).The adakite-like suites may have formed by partial melting of the thickened lower crust at 35-40 km(for the Early Ordovician arc)and>40 km(for the Middle-Late Triassic arc)depths.The Early Jurassic Fe-Cu skarn orecausative granitoids show an adakitic-normal arc transitional geochemical affinity.These granitoids were likely formed by partial melting of the juvenile lower crust(35-40 km depth),and subsequently modified by assimilation and fractional crystallization(AFC)processes.In light of the geological,geochronological and geochemical information,we proposed the following tectonometallogenic model for the Duobaoshan orefield.The Ordovician Duobaoshan may have been in a continental arc setting during the subduction of the Paleo-Asian Ocean,and formed the porphyry-related deposits at Duobaoshan,Tongshan and Zhengguang.Subduction may have ceased in the latest Ordovician,and the regional tectonics passed into long subsidence and extension till the latest Carboniferous.This extensional tectonic regime and the Silurian terrestrial-shallow marine sedimentation had likely buried and preserved the Ordovician Duobaoshan magmatic-hydrothermal system.The south-dipping Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean subduction from north of the orefield had generated the Middle-Late Triassic continental arc magmatism and the associated Tongshan PCD and Zhengguang epithermal Au mineralization(which superimposed on the Ordovician PCD system).The Middle Jurassic closure of Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean in the northwestern Amuria block(Erguna terrane),and the accompanying Siberia-Amuria collision,may have placed the Paleo-Pacific subduction system in NE China(including the orefield)under compression,and formed the granodiorite-tonalite and Fe-Cu skarn deposits at Sankuanggou and Xiaoduobaoshan.From the Middle Jurassic,the consecutive accretion of Paleo-Pacific arc terranes(e.g.,Sikhote-Alin and Nadanhada)onto the NE Asian continental margin may have gradually distant the Duobaoshan orefield from the subduction front,and consequently arc-type magmatism and the related mineralization faded.The minor Late Jurassic and Cretaceous unmineralized magmatism in the orefield may have triggered mainly by the far-field extension led by the post-collisional(Siberia-Amuria)gravitational collapse and/or Paleo-Pacific backarc-basin opening. 相似文献
16.
斑岩型矿床作为全球Cu、Mo、Au、Re等战略性矿产的主要来源，是国际矿床学界和矿业界长期关注的热点。最新研究表明，斑岩矿床既可以产于俯冲带岩浆弧环境，也可以产于与俯冲无关的非弧环境（主要包括碰撞造山环境、陆内造山环境以及活化克拉通边缘及内部），后者发育于中国大陆。文章在总结全球斑岩矿床时空分布规律的基础上，重点从成矿斑岩成因与成矿动力学机制、成矿金属来源、蚀变-矿化分带等方面，综述了2类斑岩矿床的研究进展，阐释并总结了控制斑岩成矿的主要因素与机制，以及相关研究方法。研究表明，全球斑岩矿床集中产于3大成矿域，形成时代以中、新生代为主。其中，环太平洋成矿域斑岩矿床时空分布不均，集中发育于美洲西海岸，主要形成于白垩纪以来较年轻的几个短暂时期；古亚洲洋成矿域斑岩矿床形成时间跨度于奥陶纪—早白垩世，具有“西Cu-Au东Cu-Mo、早Cu-Au晚Cu-Mo”的成矿特征；特提斯成矿域主要发育三叠纪以来的斑岩矿床，主体沿造山带分布，时间分布不均，同一构造带内发育不同时期的斑岩成矿作用；中国斑岩矿床与3大成矿域既显示出对应性，也有独特性和复杂性。弧环境成矿岩浆、金属Cu(Au)主要来源于交代地幔楔，大... 相似文献
17.
《International Geology Review》2012,54(8):985-1006
The Tianshan–Xingmeng molybdenum belt is part of a larger E–W-trending metallogenic belt in northern China. Most of these molybdenum deposits occur as porphyry or porphyry-skarn type, but there are also some vein-type deposits. Following systematic Re-Os dating of molybdenite from four deposits and comparisons with two previously dated deposits, we conclude that molybdenum mineralization in the Tianshan–Xingmeng Orogenic Belt resulted from hydrothermal activity linked to the emplacement of granitoid stocks. Three pulses of granitoid magmatism and Mo mineralization have been recognized in this study, corresponding to tectonic events in the Tianshan–Xingmeng Orogenic Belt. We identify five distinct stages of Mo mineralization events in the Tianshan–Xingmeng Orogenic Belt: 320–250 Ma, 250–200 Ma, 190–155 Ma, 155–140 Ma, and 140–120 Ma. Late Palaeozoic (320–250 Ma) Mo mineralization was closely related to closure of the Palaeo-Asian Ocean and collision between the Siberia and Tarim cratons. Triassic (250–200 Ma) Mo mineralization occurred in a post-collisional tectonic setting. The Early–Middle Jurassic (190–155 Ma) Mo mineralization was related to subduction of the Palaeo-Pacific Ocean on the eastern Asian continental margin, whereas in the Erguna block, the Mo mineralization events were associated with the subduction of the Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean. From 155 to 120 Ma, large-scale continental extension occurred in the Tianshan–Xingmeng Orogenic Belt and surrounding regions. However, the Late Jurassic (150–140 Ma) Mo mineralization events in these areas evolved in a post-orogenic extensional environment of the Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean subduction system. The Early Cretaceous (140–120 Ma) Mo mineralization occurred under the combined effects of the closure of the Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean and subduction of the Palaeo-Pacific Ocean. 相似文献
18.
《International Geology Review》2012,54(15):1837-1851
The Taipingchuan Cu–Mo deposit is a recently discovered large porphyry deposit located in the north of the Derbugan metallogenic belt of northeastern China. The geochronological data of the deposit yielded a Late Triassic zircon U–Pb age of 202 ± 6 Ma from a granodiorite porphyry that hosts the Cu–Mo mineralization. Measured Re–Os isotopes of seven disseminated molybdenite samples yielded an isochron age of 200 ± 5 Ma with mean square of weighted deviates of 2.7, while those of seven veinlet molybdenite samples also produced an isochron age of 200.1 ± 2.5 Ma and mean square of weighted deviates of 3.3. These isochron ages show that a Cu–Mo mineralization event occurred at ca. 200 Ma. Based on regional tectonic evolution, we propose that the Late Triassic Cu–Mo mineralization of the host porphyry in the Derbugan metallogenic belt was mainly associated with the subduction of the Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean slab under the Ergun block, contrary to previous suggestion that it was related to the subduction of the Mesozoic Palaeo-Pacific plate. 相似文献
19.
《International Geology Review》2012,54(18):2227-2248
ABSTRACTThe eastern Jilin and Heilongjiang provinces in China are located at the junction between the Paleo-Asian Ocean and Circum-Pacific metallogenic domains, and have been affected by the temporal transition between these domains and their superposition, resulting in intensive and complicated mineralization events. This paper provides a progress in exploration for, and geological research into, endogenic metal deposits and related magmatite in the eastern Jilin and Heilongjiang provinces. Four richly mineralized areas are recognized: (1) the Lesser Xing’an–Zhuangguangcai Range metallogenic belt; (2) the Jiamusi–Khanka metallogenic belt; (3) the Yanbian metallogenic belt; and (4) the Wandashan metallogenic belt. Four temporal peaks in magmatism and metallogenesis are identified: (1) Hercynian orogenic Au deposits (260–250 Ma) show a close relationship with magmatism related to a transitional syn- to post-collisional tectonic setting; (2) Indosinian orthomagmatic ore deposits (230–210 Ma) show a close relationship to mafic–ultramafic magmatism in a post-collision extensional setting; (3) porphyry Mo deposits and skarn deposits of the Late Triassic to the Early Jurassic (200–170 Ma) formed in a continental arc setting, triggered by slab subduction; and (4) late Yanshanian large-scale mineralization was caused by tectonic extension at 133–106 Ma. Yanshanian felsic magmatism shows clear metallogenetic specialization; i.e. each rock type hosts a different type of deposit. 相似文献
20.
Major porphyry Cu–Au and Cu–Mo deposits are distributed across almost 5000 km across central Eurasia, from the Urals Mountains in Russia in the west, to Inner Mongolia in north-eastern China. These deposits were formed during multiple magmatic episodes from the Ordovician to the Jurassic. They are associated with magmatic arcs within the extensive subduction–accretion complex of the Altaid and Transbaikal-Mongolian orogenic collages that developed from the late Neoproterozoic, through the Palaeozoic, to the Jurassic intracratonic extension. The arcs formed predominantly on the Palaeo-Tethys Ocean margin of the proto-Asian continent, but also within two back-arc basins. The development of the collages commenced when slivers of an older Proterozoic subduction complex were rifted from an existing cratonic mass and accreted to the Palaeo-Tethys Ocean margin of the combined Eastern Europe and Siberian cratons. Subduction of the Palaeo-Tethys Ocean beneath the Karakum and Altai-Tarim microcontinents and the associated back-arc basin produced the overlapping late Neoproterozoic to early Palaeozoic Tuva-Mongol and Kipchak magmatic arcs. Contemporaneous intra-oceanic subduction within the back-arc basin from the Late Ordovician produced the parallel Urals-Zharma magmatic arc, and separated the main Khanty-Mansi back-arc basin from the inboard Sakmara marginal sea. By the Late Devonian, the Tuva-Mongol and Kipchak arcs had amalgamated to form the Kazakh-Mongol arc. By the mid Palaeozoic, the two principal cratonic elements, the Siberian and Eastern European cratons, had begun to rotate relative to each other, “drawing-in” the two sets of parallel arcs to form the Kazakh Orocline between the two cratons. During the Late Devonian to Early Carboniferous, the Palaeo-Pacific Ocean began subducting below the Siberian craton to form the Sayan-Transbaikal arc, which expanded by the Permian to become the Selanga-Gobi-Khanka arc. By the Middle to Late Permian, as the Kazakh Orocline continued to develop, both the Sakmara and Khanty-Mansi back-arc basins were closed and the collage of cratons and arcs were sutured by accretionary complexes. During the Permian and Triassic, the North China craton approached and docked with the continent, closing the Mongol-Okhotsk Sea, an embayment on the Palaeo-Pacific margin, to form the Mongolian Orocline. Subduction and arc-building activity on the Palaeo-Pacific Ocean margin continued to the mid Mesozoic as the Indosinian and Yanshanian orogens.Significant porphyry Cu–Au/Mo and Au–Cu deposits were formed during the Ordovician in the Kipchak arc (e.g., Bozshakol Cu–Au in Kazakhstan and Taldy Bulak porphyry Cu–Au in Kyrgyzstan); Silurian to Devonian in the Kazakh-Mongol arc (e.g., Nurkazgan Cu–Au in Kazakhstan and Taldy Bulak-Levoberezhny Au in Kyrgyzstan); Devonian in the Urals-Zharma arc (e.g., Yubileinoe Au–Cu in Russia); Devonian in the Kazakh-Mongol arc (e.g., Oyu Tolgoi Cu–Au, and Tsagaan Suvarga Cu–Au, in Mongolia); Carboniferous in the Kazakh-Mongol arc (e.g., Kharmagtai Au–Cu in Mongolia, Tuwu-Yandong Cu–Au in Xinjiang, China, Koksai Cu–Au, Kounrad Cu–Au and the Aktogai Group of Cu–Au deposits, in Kazakhstan); Carboniferous in the Valerianov-Beltau-Kurama arc (e.g., Kal’makyr–Dalnee Cu–Au in Uzbekistan; Benqala Cu–Au in Kazakhstan); Late Carboniferous to Permian in the Selanga-Gobi-Khanka arc (e.g., Duobaoshan Cu–Au in Inner Mongolia, China); Triassic in the Selanga-Gobi-Khanka arc; and Jurassic in the Selanga-Gobi-Khanka arc (e.g., Wunugetushan Cu–Mo and Jiguanshan Mo in Inner Mongolia, China). In addition to the tectonic, geologic and metallogenic setting and distribution of porphyry Cu–Au/Mo mineralisation within central Eurasia, the setting, geology, alteration and mineralisation at each of the deposits listed above is described and summarised in Table 1. 相似文献