4.6 Letter

The Phalabowra (Palabora) carbonatite-hosted magnetite-copper sulfide deposit, South Africa: an end member of the iron-oxide copper-gold-rare earth element deposit group?

期刊

MINERALIUM DEPOSITA
卷 36, 期 2, 页码 189-194

出版社

SPRINGER-VERLAG
DOI: 10.1007/s001260050298

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Olympic Dam-type iron-oxide copper-gold deposits are widely recognised in terrains with significant Palaeoproterozoic to Mesoproterozoic granitic magmatism. Most researchers favour a magmatic association for these deposits, but none of the 100-2000 Mt recognised copper-bearing deposits has a spatial and/or temporal relationship to an intrusive body of sufficient dimensions to produce the hosting giant breccia and/or hydrothermal systems. In other words, if the recognised ore-bodies are magmatic-hydrothermal, they must be classified as distal deposits. The magnetite copper-phosphate-rare earth element pipe-like carbonatite-hosted orebody at Loolekop, within the larger Phalabowra Carbonatite Complex, has many features to suggest that it represents an end member of the Olympic Dam-type deposit class hosted within its magmatic source rock. It (1) Falls broadly within the appropriate age range, (2) has a similar giant size and low copper grade, (3) is dominated by magnetite, (4) has sulfur-poor copper-sulfide minerals and lacks iron sulfides, (5) is silica-poor, and (6) is enriched in REE, particularly LREE, as well as P, F, U and Th. As an end member of the Olympic Dam-type deposits, the Loolekop orebody can help explain the common siting of the deposits at craton edges or other lithospheric boundaries, where decompression melting of metasomatised mantle can produce volatile-rich alkaline melts (rich in REE, P, F, etc.). Such melts are capable of generating sulfur-deficient volatiles enriched in copper and gold, among other elements, as well as phreatic breccia pipes and associated intense metasomatism, the most common features of the Olympic Dam-type deposits.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据