Travel Blog: Howard Street Robinson Lecture Tour, Atlantic Leg, February 2016

This is the second travel blog post (the first blog is here) for the Howard Street Robinson Lecture Tour sponsored by the Geological Association of Canada. In February, I undertook the Atlantic leg of the tour where I gave four lectures in Halifax, Wolfville, and Antigonish. I gave lectures on: 1) Semi-permeable interface model for subseafloor replacement-style volcanogenic massive sulphide (VMS) deposits, which was based on my recent paper in Economic Geology (replacement talk); and 2) Zn-rich volcanogenic massive sulphide (VMS) deposits, which is based on another recent paper of mine in an Irish Association of Economic Geology Special Publication (Zn-rich VMS talk).

Stop 1 – Halifax. My first stop of the Atlantic leg was at St. Mary’s University on February 1, where I gave the replacement talk. There were some great discussions afterwards about fluid advection, replacement processes, and VMS deposits, and thanks to those that took the time to come. Special thanks to Jacob Hanley for organizing things in St. Mary’s and to my hosts Kevin Neyedley and Mitch Kerr for showing me around, touring the facilities, spending time with me talking about their research, and their overall hospitality.

Great landmark and place to visit in Halifax!

 

Stop 2 – Wolfville. My second stop on the Atlantic leg was at Acadia University on February 2nd where I gave the talk on Zn-rich VMS deposits. There were a lot of great questions and discussions on recognizing magmatic fluids in VMS deposits, VMS in the Appalachians and the wonderful natural laboratory we get to work on! and A special thanks to Sandra Barr for the invite, her hospitality and arranging things on the tour (including the really cool place to stay while there – the Blomidon Inn). It was also great to catch up with numerous people there including Sandra, Chris White, Cliff Stanley, Scott Swinden, and Peir Pufahl, and  chat about tectonics, geochemistry, and VMS deposits. Thanks for taking the time.

View looking out from the Blomidon Inn looking out over Wolfville with the Minas Basin in the background.

Stop 3 – Antigonish. The third stop on the Atlantic leg was at St. Francis Xavier University where I gave the Zn-rich VMS talk on February 3rd. There was a great discussion about magmatic fluids, Zn contents of fluids, distribution of magmatic input in VMS through time (and lack thereof), water depth in VMS, and so on. I thank Evelise Bourlon for arranging the talks and other logistics. I would also like to thank Brendan Murphy and Alan Anderson for their hospitality there, for the great craft beer (when in Antigonish check out this place), and the opportunity to chat about tectonics and ore deposits!

View over St. FX campus.

Stop 4 – Halifax. The final talk on the Atlantic Leg was at Dalhousie University where I gave the Zn-rich VMS talk on February 4th. The discussion session was fantastic with lots of tangents into anoxia, framboids and sulfur isotopes, Irish-type Zn-Pb mineralization, secular distributions of VMS and metal contents, sources of metals and fluids. Lots of fun. I would like to both Yana Fedortchouk and John Gosse for their hospitality and the discussions. I would like to especially thank John for the invite, arranging things, touring me around Dalhousie, and hosting me while there.

I apologize to all on the Atlantic Leg as it seems I was finishing a talk and running off to another destination. I wish I had more time at each place to talk more science. Thanks again to all for the hospitality, I know that you are all busy, but I really appreciate the time taken to host me!

Stay tuned, one more leg in Ontario and Quebec to come!

Travel Blog: Howard Street Robinson Lecture Tour, Western Leg, Nov 2015.

I have had the pleasure of being the Howard Street Robinson Medal winner of the Geological Association of Canada for 2015-2016. As part of the medal I am giving a lecture tour across Canada and just currently undertook the western leg of the tour where I gave 12 lectures in Whitehorse, Vancouver, Kelowna, Saskatoon, Regina, and Winnipeg. I will be undertaking additional legs in 2016. I gave three different presentations during this leg of the tour, including: 1) Seafloor Hydrothermal Systems: What are they? Their significance. Resources on sea and land, and life on the early Earth, which was a general talk aimed at a non-expert audience (seafloor vent talk); 2) Semi-permeable interface model for subseafloor replacement-style volcanogenic massive sulphide (VMS) deposits, which was based on my recent paper in Economic Geology (replacement talk); and 3) Zn-rich volcanogenic massive sulphide (VMS) deposits, which is based on another recent paper of mine in an Irish Association of Economic Geology Special Publication (Zn-rich VMS talk).

It was a great trip and outlined below are the locations and places I gave various talks and thanks to my hosts for their hospitality and the invites.

Stop 1 – Whitehorse – I gave two talks in Whitehorse, including the seafloor vents talk at Yukon College on November 13th, and the replacement talk in the Yukon Geoscience Forum on November 17th. It was great to hang out with may old Yukon friends and colleagues and talk Yukon geology again. A special thanks goes out to Joel Cubley from Yukon College for the invite to present at the college, and for Mo Colpron for hosting me while in Whitehorse.

SS Klondike near the Yukon River, Whitehorse taken early morning.

Stop 2 – Vancouver – My first talk in Vancouver was on November 18th and jointly sponsored by the Geological Association of Canada Cordilleran Section and the Mineral Deposit Research Centre at UBC and was on Zn-rich VMS. There was a fantastic crowd of old friends, colleagues from industry, and some former students. The question session was excellent with some really insightful questions. Thanks to Thomas Bissig for his hospitality and hosting me while in Vancouver.

I also gave two talks at UBC and SFU on November 20th. I gave the replacement talk at UBC (my alma mater!) in the morning, and it was hosted by the local SEG Student Chapter. There was a great question and answer session after the talk with a lots of great questions on bacteria, VMS genesis, and the nature of replacement processes. Special thanks to Rachel Kim and the SEG Student Chapter for hosting me. I gave a second talk on Zn-rich VMS at SFU in the afternoon. There were excellent questions on the role of magmatic fluids in VMS, boiling, ocean chemistry, and tectonics. It was really great to catch up with colleagues there I hadn’t seen in a while and to chat with students. Special thanks to Dan Marshall for hosting me while there.

Stroll along the seawall, Vancouver.

Stop 3 – Kelowna – I spent a great day on November 19th at UBC Okanagan and gave the seafloor vents talk. It was my first time to the campus and had a great day checking out the department and facilities, catching up with faculty, and chatting with students. Even had a chance to look at some great textures in young volcanic rocks! I’d like to thank the faculty and students that took time out to hang out with me while there, the questions after the talk (many that I couldn’t answer but it gave me some ideas about things I need to read about!), and particularly Ed Hornibrook and Janet Heisler for the excellent visit and their hospitality (I’ll wear my UBC hat with pride!).

Flying out over Okanagan Lake.

Stop 4 – Saskatoon – Had the pleasure of visiting colleagues at Saskatoon to give two talks on November 23rd. I gave the Zn-rich VMS talk at the CIM Geological Society Saskatoon Branch and thank Shayne Rozdilsky for arranging this. Great turnout with a lot of interesting questions and great to see colleagues from the local industry, including one of my former students! I gave a second talk on replacement-type VMS at the University of Saskatchewan to a student-rich audience, which was followed up by a great question period with some excellent questions on metal zoning in replacement systems, sulphur isotopes, processes for replacement, etc.. I was also lucky to have a fantastic tour of the Canadian Light Source synchrotron with Joyce McBeth (and fellow UBCer from the late 90s!). Pretty amazing place and got some great insight into what the synchrotron can be used for, and what kind of research could be done in economic geology using said instrument. I’d like to also thank Camille Partin and Kevin Ansdell for their hospitality and hosting me while there.

Canadian Light Source synchrotron.

Be very wary of synchrotron operators in their natural habitat!

Stop 5 – Regina – I gave two talks in Regina on November 24th. The first talk was on Zn-rich VMS to the Saskatchewan Geological Society. The talk was in arguably the coolest venue on the tour (the Artful Dodger Cafe) with great turnout and great questions. I also ran into a friend from my first field season in 1993! The second talk was in the afternoon on replacement-type VMS at the University or Regina. The talk had a great audience with a lot of discussions and questions on bacterial colonies in VMS, framboids, Precambrian replacement-type deposits, and faunal colonies around hydrothermal vents.  I thank Tsilavo Raharimahefa and Guoxiang Chi  for their help and hosting me at the University of Regina, and Jason Cosford, Bernadette Knox, Kate MacLachlan, Ryan Morelli, and Murray Rogers from the Saskatchewan Geological Society (and Saskatchewan Geological Survey and APEGS) for organizing the SGS talk and their hospitality while in Regina.

Solitary tree on a lonely, snowy prairie en route to Regina (or awakening the spirit of Sinclair Ross).

Stop 6 – Winnipeg – I gave two talks in Winnipeg. The first talk was on replacement-type VMS at the Manitoba Geological Survey on November 25th. This talk had a great question session with survey staff (and former survey staff) on sulphur isotopes, metamorphism and its influence on textures and isotopes, preservation of textures in ancient rocks, and heat budgets and architecture of basins hosting VMS deposits. The second talk on November 26th was at the University of Manitoba and co-hosted by the GAC Winnipeg Section, and was on Zn-rich VMS deposits. There was quite a diverse audience of faculty, students, survey, and industry. Some great questions after the talk on preservation vs. process in deposit distribution, carbonate alteration in VMS, and even on the Buchans deposits in Newfoundland. I’d like to thank Alfredo Camacho and Mostafa Fayek for their hospitality at U of M, Christian Böhm at the Manitoba Geological Survey, and a special thanks to Scott Anderson for hosting me during the entire trip!

The preparation and execution of a tour like this requires a lot of work on multiple fronts (as illustrated by the local hosts above). I would like to give special thanks to Alwynne Beaudoin, GAC Lecture Tour Coordinator for doing so much behind the scenes for the tour; James Conliffe, GAC Secretary/Treasurer, who did a lot of the promotion and social media shout outs for the tour; and Karen Johnston-Fowler at GAC headquarters who has helped immensely with the logistical and financial aspects of the tour.

Stay tuned for updates on the next leg!

Steve.

Dr. Harold (Hank) Williams (1934-2010), FRSC – CMHOF Inductee for 2016

It’s great pleasure to share that former Professor of Earth Sciences at Memorial University, Dr. Hank Williams, was recently announced as one of the 2016 inductees into the Canadian Mining Hall of Fame. Hank has received many tributes in his career, including an outstanding new book “Realtime Geological Syntheses: Remembering Harold ‘Hank’ Williams” by the Geological Association of Canada, but his induction into the Canadian Mining Hall of Fame is particularly satisfying as Hank was not an Economic Geologist, nor was he directly involved in mining or mineral exploration. Despite this, his work had great influence on our understanding of geological and tectonic processes, which in turn had significant impact on mining and mineral exploration.

The nomination was a collective effort between colleagues Frank Blackwood, Peter Dimmell, and I, and we received numerous letters of support from other colleagues that were critical to the nomination’s success. I would like to thank all letter writers: Dr. Jim Franklin, Dr. Jeremy Hall, Dr. John Hanchar, Mr. Bob Kelly, Dr. Tom Lane, Dr. Bill Mercer, Mr. Gerry Squires, Dr. David Strong, Dr. Scott Swinden, Dr. Geoff Thurlow, Mr. Roger Wallis, and Dr. Richard Wardle. In addition, Dr. Bill Roscoe is thanked for his support during the nomination process.

Outlined below is an edited version of the nomination presented here as a tribute to Hank, but also to illustrate how Hank’s basic geological observational data and big picture thinking were relevant not only to understanding geological processes, but also had a longer term impact on mineral exploration and development.

Dr Harold (Hank) Williams (1934-2010), FRSC – Nomination for the Canadian Mining Hall of Fame

Dr. Harold (Hank) Williams was one of Canada’s most preeminent geoscientists .  His work greatly influenced the thinking of generations of geoscientists, especially those working in regional mapping and metallogeny.

His fundamentals-based approach to Geoscience through mapping, regional geological synthesis, and tectonic reconstructions of mountain belts laid the framework and thought processes behind predictive metallogeny.  This approach to mineral discovery has become a fundamental tool that has led to exploration and development successes in Canada, and continues to be used in the modern mining and exploration sectors globally.  While Hank was not a classic Economic Geologist, nor directly involved with the mining industry, his work and the extensions of this work provided fundamental geological knowledge used in modern mineral exploration and mining.

Career Overview, Contributions, and Legacy

Dr. Hank Williams was born in St. John’s, Newfoundland, and obtained BSc (1956) and MSc (1958) degrees from Memorial University.  He undertook a PhD at the University of Toronto (1961); his thesis involved geological mapping and metamorphic work in the Chisel Lake area, host to numerous deposits in the Snow Lake Mining Camp.  His thesis results were published as maps, a Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) Memoir, and an article in the Canadian Mining Journal.  This work was instrumental in putting the important deposits of the Chisel Lake area in regional context and,  to the surprise of many, he argued that the massive sulfides were exhalative, not replacement deposits as was in vogue at the time.  Following his PhD, Hank became a geologist in the Appalachian Section of the Geological Survey of Canada where he undertook regional mapping in various locations in the Appalachians.  During his time at the GSC, he published a seminal paper entitled “The Appalachians in Northeastern Newfoundland: A Two-Side Symmetrical System” in the American Journal of Science (1964).  His 1964 paper, and his 1967 synthetic geological compilation map of the Island of Newfoundland, were landmark contributions.  They were the first on-land syntheses of an orogenic belt to be placed in a plate tectonic framework.  The theory of plate tectonics was in its infancy at this point, and Hank’s work in Newfoundland greatly influenced the work of others, including Canadian Mining Hall of Famer Dr. J. Tuzo Wilson.  Dr. Wilson went on to publish his landmark paper (Nature, 1964) on the opening and closing of the Atlantic after Hank’s 1964 publication.  Hank’s on-land contributions were synchronous with Wilson and others, and they were critical in moving the plate tectonic revolution forward.

In 1968 Hank moved back to St. John’s to become an Associate Professor in the newly rejuvenated Department of Geology at Memorial University.  Hank continued his research in the Appalachians, often in conjunction with the GSC, and was promoted to Professor in 1971, University Research Professor from 1984-1989, Alexander Murray Professor from 1990-1995, and then as a Professor until his official retirement in 1999.  During his time at Memorial Hank received numerous awards.  He was one of the youngest individuals to be elected as a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada, and was also awarded the Miller Medal from the same group for his contributions to geoscience.  He was also awarded the Logan and Past President’s Medal of the Geological Association of Canada; the R.J.W. Douglas Medal and Special Service Medal of the Canadian Society for Petroleum Geologists (it being recognition from the oil industry of the impact of his tectonic syntheses on petroleum exploration); and was named University Research Professor from 1984-1989 at Memorial University, an award given only to the top researchers.

The numerous awards received reflected the ground-breaking work that he undertook at Memorial.  One of his greatest contributions was his synthesis of the Appalachian mountain chain from Alabama to Newfoundland, published in 1978 (Tectonic – Lithofacies Map of the Appalachian Orogen) by Memorial University.  This map was one of the first continental-scale compilations of an ancient orogen, and it was the geological basis for his 1979 paper in the Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences (Appalachian Orogen in Canada – cited over 450 times).  The lithofacies map and paper provided a new approach to subdividing orogens based on the assemblages of rocks and their tectonic affinities; this significantly influenced the suspect terrane and tectonic assemblage concept that was utilized in many orogens globally (e.g., Cordillera – Coney et al., 1980 – Nature).  In addition to his synthesis work, Hank contributed greatly to understanding the emplacement of ophiolites, rift-drift transitions and the breakup of continents, collisional and accretionary tectonics, and the significance of mélanges in orogenic belts.  He continued to produce papers and maps into his retirement, including editing the Decade of North American Geology volume on the Appalachians.   In one of his final papers (Tectonics of Atlantic Canada – Geoscience Canada), he wrote about the “Harry Hibbs Effect” named after well-known Newfoundland accordion player Harry Hibbs.  Hank compared the geological formation of Atlantic Canada to the opening and closing of an accordion, whereby the opening and closing of oceans resulting in the formation of the Grenville and Appalachian orogens, and the modern Atlantic Ocean.

The Harry Hibbs Effect illustrated Hank’s ability to take complex information, synthesize it, and make it accessible not only to scientists, but the general public.  Hank gave public lectures on the Appalachians to numerous community groups up until his death in 2010.  While formally talking about geology and tectonics, after the talks he would also commonly play various instruments and entertain audiences with his musical talents.  His innate ability to connect on both a professional and personal level allowed his message about the Appalachians and Geoscience, in general, to be well received by diverse audiences, thereby increasing the impact of our discipline on the general public.

Impact on Canadian (and Global) Mineral Exploration and Mining

Dr. Williams’ work  influences mining and mineral exploration in Canada and globally.  Hank was a preeminent field geologist whose work was based on careful field observations, and then using these outcrop-scale relationships to decipher regional tectonics and the evolution of the Appalachian-Caledonian Orogen, from southern US to Scandinavia.  His groundbreaking synthesis and tectonic lithofacies map of the Appalachians was one of the first of its kind globally and provided one of the first plate tectonic syntheses of an ancient orogen.   His map placed different mineral deposit types, ranging from massive sulfide (e.g., Bathurst, Buchans, ophiolite-hosted VMS deposits), carbonate-hosted Pb-Zn (e.g., Daniel’s Harbour), to syngenetic and orogenic gold deposits (e.g., Carolina Slate Belt, Meguma, Baie Verte district), in a regional tectonic context, which had never been done in the Appalachians, or in other orogens globally.   As stated in the support letter of Mr. Gerry Squires, modern mineral exploration “lives and dies with the compilation”, and Hank’s compilation of the Appalachians, born from careful observations, coupled with his geological insight and innovation, has significantly influenced exploration geologists in the Appalachians.  It helped them focus their exploration strategies and define explore targets, which ultimately resulted in the discovery of new deposits, some of which have subsequently gone into production (e.g., past-producing Duck Pond mine).

Hank’s regional tectonic synthesis, placing deposits in a plate tectonic framework, was groundbreaking, influencing many of his colleagues in academia, government, and industry, and it was the seed for the concept of regional metallogeny.   Up to this time most Economic Geologists did not think of ore deposits in a regional tectonic context, and his research resulted in the dawn of predictive metallogeny and a greater understanding of the regional to local scale controls on ore deposit localization.  Industry luminaries embraced this concept utilizing it for area selection,  global terrane selection, thereby cementing regional metallogeny as an important component of research and exploration (e.g., Dr. Richard Hutchinson (a CMHOF inductee), 1973 – Economic Geology on VMS and Their Metallogenic Significance; Dr. David Strong – 1976 – Metallogeny and Plate Tectonics; Dr. Duncan Derry (a CMHOF inductee) – 1980 -World Atlas of Geology and Mineral Deposits).  The Appalachians and Hank’s work thus became the example of how to link regional mapping and tectonic syntheses to metallogeny.  Furthermore, Hank’s integrated approach became the basis for numerous government and industry-funded projects that have been of great significance to the mining industry of Canada and Canadian Geoscience, including:

• the Pan-Canadian LITHOPROBE project;
• the National Mapping (NATMAP), Exploration Technology (EXTECH), and Targeted Geoscience Initiative (TGI) projects of the Geological Survey of Canada; and
• a generation of students who have gone on to make contributions to both tectonics and mineral deposits in a Canadian and international context (see below).

Hank has also been responsible for training a generation of geologists to read the rocks, training both undergraduate and graduate students to use field relationships, obtained through mapping and outcrop-scale observations, to understand processes on regional tectonic scales.  His cross-island fieldtrips of the Newfoundland Appalachians allowed student, industry, and government geologists to understand how to tackle the synthesis of an orogenic belt, such that the Newfoundland Appalachians has become a key field location for students and professionals to understand tectonic processes and where mineral deposits fit into a regional tectonic framework.  Hank taught and trained his students with an enthusiasm and excitement for the rocks that was unparalleled, and influenced a generation of students that had a real interest in rocks and relationships (i.e., mapping skills), not just laboratory or computer-based information.   These skills and thinking were critical in creating geologists, many of whom went into industry, and utilized their knowledge in exploration and mining.  Furthermore, he created a legacy of mentorship, both at Memorial University and in his former students, that continues to be passed on: in that field observations, geological relationships, and geological maps remain the fundamental building blocks of effective mineral exploration and development.

Summary

Dr. Harold Williams is the father of the synthesis of ancient orogenic belts and placing them in a regional tectonic framework.

His work was the seed that spawned the concept of regional metallogy, and of using tectonic lithofacies assemblages for predicting potentially fertile ground for mineral exploration and development.   In some cases, this work led directly to deposit discoveries and eventual mines (e.g., Duck Pond mine).  His scientific endeavours were paralleled by a career of training geoscientists and influencing his peers to use field observations, mapping, and intellectual intuition to understand the evolution of orogenic belts and the mineral deposits in them.

This has been a great benefit to our country and to the mining and mineral exploration industry of Canada.   He has made outstanding Technical and Supporting Contributions (categories 2 and 3) to Geoscience knowledge, and is a more than worthy candidate for the Canadian Mining Hall of Fame.

Stephen J. Piercey, R. Frank Blackwood, and Peter M. Dimmell.

New publications from my research group (02/06/14)

It’s been a while since I’ve updated this blog. The combination of fieldwork, teaching, and just being generally busy, hasn’t provided much time for extra-curricular writing.

I’m taking a bit of a departure from previous posts, and just providing an update post of some recent papers and research coming out of my research group. When I get some more time I’ll update the blog with some more paper reviews, and I’m always interested in comments and suggestions from people.

My group has been working on a variety of projects, including massive sulphide research in Newfoundland (and elsewhere), work on portable X-ray fluorescence, and general work on quality control and quality assurance in lithogeochemical data.

My MSc student Shannon Gill has just published her first fieldwork article in Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) Current Research.  Her research is on mineralogy, metal zoning, and evolution of the Zn-Pb-Ba-Ag-Au-bearing Lemarchant volcanogenic massive sulphide deposit.  The paper breaks out the various facies and illustrates how the deposit is different than most bimodal felsic VMS deposits in  having abundant sulphosalts and a likely epithermal input to the metal budget of the deposit.  The paper can be downloaded here.

My PhD student Jean-Luc Pilote has just published his first fieldwork article of his PhD also in GSC Current Research.  His thesis is aimed at reconstructing the stratigraphy, structure, and hydrothermal alteration of the Au-bearing Ming VMS deposit.  His work is also utilizing lithogeochemistry, U-Pb geochronology, and radiogenic isotopes to understand the petrology, chemostratigraphy, alteration and timing of various events in the deposit, and the evolution of the deposit to the regional tectonic and metallogenic framework of the Baie Verte Peninsula.  The initial results of his mapping last year on the 1807 Zone of the Ming Deposit are presented here.

In addition to students, I have has two papres recently published.  The first paper is an invited contribution to Geoscience Canada and is a review article on quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) in lithogeochemistry.  The paper is written for a non-expert and covers various topics including sampling, precision, accuracy, contamination, and general monitoring of lithogeochemical data during a QA/QC program.  For those interested in this you can get a copy of the paper here.

The second paper that has come out is on the utilization of portable X-ray fluorescence and published in Geochemistry: Exploration, Environment, Analysis.  My group has been spending a lot of time developing pXRF for utilization in lithogeochemistry and this paper reports on our approach to calibrating the instrument (single point calibration method) and provides results on international reference materials and samples that had previously been analyzed by other methods.  The results illustrate that the pXRF has considerable potential as an initial means of screening data and providing ‘fit for purpose’ information, but it is not a substitute for traditional methods.  The other major outcome of this paper is that it provides a calibration method that is relatively straightforward, and yields reasonably precise and accurate data to understand alteration, chemostratigraphy, and general metal values for samples.  The approach is now being used in conjunction with collaborators on archived assay pulps from other sites/deposits for alteration mapping and chemostratigraphy.  Those interested in a copy of the paper can find it here.  There are also numerous other great papers recently published in a thematic set on pXRF in Geochemistry: Exploration, Environment, and Analysis.  This group of papers is worth checking out as it is the current state of pXRF knowledge applied to lithogeochemistry and exploration geochemistry.

Stay tuned as well as there some more papers coming out of our group in the coming months on gold-rich massive sulphide deposits and emplacement mechanisms in VMS deposits.  I’ll also do a quick overview of these papers when they come out.

Noble Metals, Subcontinental Lithosphere, and Ni-Cu-PGE Deposits

Recent research by Kamenetsky et al. published in Geology provides insight into the nature of the parental magmas potentially responsible for the formation of nickel-copper-platinum group element (Ni-Cu-PGE) deposits in intra-plate environments.  Previous researchers have illustrated the importance of the mantle-derived magmas and subcontinental lithospheric mantle in the formation of Ni-Cu-PGE deposits (e.g., Arndt et al., 2005); however, finding the nature of occurrence and concentrations of chalcophile elements in primary magmas from the subcontinental lithosphere has been problematic.  New research by Kamentsky et al. provide significant insight into this problem.

The work of Kamenetsky studied unusual rocks from the Bouvet Triple Junction of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge.  These rocks are unusual and unlike normal basaltic oceanic crust, having continental (i.e., evolved) radiogenic isotope signatures suggesting derivation from the subcontinental lithospheric mantle.   Moreover, they are exceptionally well preserved, glassy, and contain sulfide globules within the glasses (Figure 1).  It is these sulfide globules that provide critical insight into the nature and composition of chalcophile elements in the subcontinental lithospheric mantle.

Figure 1.  Reflected-light photograph sulfide globule in basalt glass from the Bouvet Triple Junction  and X-ray maps of elemental distribution within the globule.  Hotter colours reflect higher concentrations. From Kamenetsky et al. (2013).

Most sulfide globules within the basalt glass are less than five microns; however, one globule was large enough to allow detailed mineralogical and geochemical study.  The large globule contains Fe-Ni sulfides interpreted to be immiscible sulfides that quenched during basalt eruption  (Figure 1).  The globules also contain Fe-oxyhydroxides, minor Cr-rich magnetite, and micro-nuggets rich in Pt, Pd, Au, and Sn, including: pure Pt; Pt-Sn alloys; Au, Pt-Au, Pt-Au-Sn alloys; and rustenburgite (Pt,Pd)₃Sn (Figure 2).  In addition, laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometric (LA-ICP-MS) analysis of the droplet has elevated chalcophile element contents (46 ppm Pt; 41 ppm Pd; 3 ppm Rh; 15 ppm Ru; 7.5 ppm Os; 14 ppm Au; and 15 ppm Ag); the samples also have chondrite-normalized noble metal signatures broadly similar to PGE-bearing layered intrusive complexes (e.g., Merensky Reef).

Figure 2.  Scanning electron images of sulfide globules wtih sulfides (light grey), Fe-oxyhydroxide (dark grey), Cr-magnetite (grey) and nuggets of noble metals (white).  From Kamenetsky et al. (2013).

While there are many features that are required to form an economic Ni-Cu-PGE-rich sulfide deposits (e.g.,  Naldrett, 1997), the results from Kamenetsky et al. illustrate that melts from the subcontinental lithospheric mantle contain Ni, Cu and PGE contents up to 2-times the values present in melts derived from the depleted mantle (e.g., N-MORB).  Hence, subcontinental lithospheric mantle melts are charged in Ni-Cu-PGE and therefore are important potential targets for exploration in the ancient geological record (see also Arndt et al., 2005 and Begg et al., 2010).

Classic papers in Economic Geology: Campbell and Naldrett (1979) – The Influence of Silicate-Sulfide Ratios on the Geochemistry of Magmatic Sulfides

Magmatic sulfide deposits are critical sources of nickel (Ni), copper (Cu), and platinum group elements (PGE) globally.  These deposits form from the segregation of a sulfide liquid from a silicate liquid, similar to oil separating from water, due to the sulfide saturation of a mantle-derived (i.e., mafic or ultramafic) silicate melt.  While igneous fractionation can cause sulfide saturation in a mafic-ultramafic melt, it often produces minor amounts of sulfide mineralization.  To form significant quantities of sulfide mineralization requires addition of external sulfur (and/or silica) to the mafic-ultramafic magma, typically via crustal contamination or crustal devolatilization.  If sulfide saturation of the mafic-ultramafic magma occurs there is a partitioning of elements between the silicate magma and the segregating sulfide liquid.  In particular, the chalcophile elements, such as Ni, Cu, and the PGE, are scavenged from the silicate liquid and partition into the sulfide liquid, thereby creating a sulfide liquid enriched in chalcophile elements and a silicate liquid depleted in chalcophile elements (e.g., Naldrett, 2010 and references therein).  The final concentration of the chalcophile metals in the sulfide liquid is dependent on a number of factors including the initial concentration of chalcophile metals in the parental silicate liquid, how readily the element partitions into the sulfide liquid (i.e., the partition coefficient), and the mass of silicate liquid to sulfide liquid (e.g., Campbell and Naldrett, 1979; Barnes et al., 1997, Lesher and Burnham, 2001).

In the late 1970s, while researchers understood that Ni, Cu, and PGE had high partition coefficients and preferentially partitioned into sulfide liquids (e.g., Rajamani and Naldrett, 1978), there was still a problem yet to be solved: how could a sulfide melt become enriched to percent levels in Ni and Cu  when the parental silicate magma contained only par parts per million or parts per billion chalcophile elements? This problem was even more significant for the PGE, which were present in parts per billion levels in parental silicate magmas.  The paper by Campbell and Naldrett (1979) was a critical paper in addressing this metal enrichment problem and introduced the term the R-factor.

The R-factor represents the mass of silicate magma that a segregated sulfide liquid has equilibrated with.  In essence, if we have a litre of sulfide liquid and an R-factor of 10 it means that the sulfide liquid equilibrated with 10 litres of silicate magma.  My colleague Michael Lesher provides an outstanding analogy for the R-factor by comparing it to wearing a sweater (sulfide liquid) while running through a forest (silicate liquid).  As you run through the forest burrs from the trees (burrs = Ni, Cu, or PGE) get stuck to your sweater.  If you run through the forest once (low R-factor) only a few burrs will stick to your sweater (i.e., low grade mineralization).  In contrast, as you run through the woods more and more (high R-factor), more and more burrs will stick to the sweater (i.e., high grade mineralization).  It’s great analogy for teaching students the concept of the R-factor and how it can control metal grades in magmatic sulfides.

Campbell and Naldrett (1979) provided a mathematical formulation of the above illustrating that the grade (tenor) of a sulfide liquid (C_l) is dependent on the initial concentration of metal in the silicate magma (C_o), the degree to which an element partitions into the sulfide liquid (i.e., the partition coefficient given by D_i = [i]_{sulfide liquid}/[i]_{silicate liquid}, where i = element of interest, such as Ni, Cu, PGE), and the R-factor:

C_l = [C_oD_i(R+1)]/(R+D_i)…….(1)

(see also Barnes et al., 1997, Lesher and Burnham, 2001, and Naldrett, 2010 for further reviews).  It is obvious from equation (1) that with an increase in C_o there will be an increase in C_l, all other things being equal (Figures 1).  Therefore, the grade of Ni-Cu-PGE in a sulfide liquid (and deposit) will be proportional the amount of metal in the starting liquid. However, if we look at R=1 to 100, even with a metal-rich magma we cannot create sulfide liquids that have ore grades (Figure 2).  This is where the R-factor comes in. In order to achieve ore grade sulfide mineralization a very high R-factor is required: the sulfide liquid must equilibrate with significant quantities of metal-bearing silicate magma (Figures 1 and 2).  In Figure 2, an example of Ni, Cu, and Pt is used with rough ore grade values shown.  In the case of Ni and Cu, they are in sufficient abundance in mantle-derived magmas that they only require R-factors of 100s to 1000s to yield ore grade mineralization (Figure 2).  In contrast, low concentration elements like Pt (and other PGE) require significantly higher R-factors, ~10000 or higher, to achieve ore grade (Figure 2).

Figure 1.  Concentration of Ni in a sulfide liquid in equilibrium with a silicate magma as a function of R-factor and initial concentration (C_o); D_Ni = 500.  Notably, at a given R-factor the initial concentration of Ni the silicate melt will control the tenor (grade) of the sulfide liquid.  It is also notable, that with increasing R-factor there is an increase in the grade of Ni in the sulfide liquid.

Figure 2.  R-factor models for various Ni, Cu, and Pt (D_Ni = 500 , D_Cu = 1500, and D_Pt = 10,000).  Also shown is an approximate ore grade for the various commodities.  This diagram illustrates the importance of both the starting concentration of an element (C_o) and also how increased R-factor is required to generate ore grade mineralization.  Also evident is that for PGE-rich deposits the R-factor requires is an order of magnitude higher (or more) than it is for the base metals Ni and Cu, and explains why many PGE-rich deposits are associated with large igneous provinces with high volumes of magmatism.

While the R-factor explained how we could achieve grade in mineralization, it also had (and has) broader implications for the exploration for Ni-Cu-PGE sulfide deposits. While obvious, it illustrates the importance of identifying areas that contain potential Ni-Cu-PGE-rich parental magmas (e.g,. picritic to komatiitic magmatic belts; Keays, 1995).  The high R-factor also implies that  large igneous provinces (LIP), especially those in continental environments, are obvious targets for Ni-Cu-PGE mineralization (e.g., Lightfoot and Hawkesworth, 1997; Lightfoot 2007, and references therein; Begg et al., 2010 and references therein).  For example, the largest Ni-Cu-PGE resources outside of Sudbury, are hosted in the Noril’sk-Talnakh area within flood basalts of the Siberian Traps, Russia (e.g., Lightfoot and Hawkesworth, 1997), and the largest PGE resources are hosted within the layered intrusive complexes of the Bushveld Igneous Complex, South Africa (e.g., Cawthorn, 1999; Maier et al., 2013).  It also led to recognition of geological settings within LIP that exhibited evidence for repeated magma flow through the Ni-Cu-PGE sulfide forming environment, such as channelized flows in komatiite fields (e.g., Kambalda – Lesher and Arndt, 1995) and magma conduits in intrusions (e.g., Voisey’s Bay; Naldrett, 2010 and references therein).

My next blog post will build this one and cover recent research on metal-rich magmas from the subcontinental lithosphere and their importance for magmatic Ni-Cu-PGE sulfide genesis.

Earthquake-Induced Geochemical Anomalies

A recent review article by Cameron illustrates the importance of earthquakes in the generation of geochemical anomalies above buried mineral deposits.  The paper builds on previous work by Cameron and colleagues (e.g., Cameron et al., 2002; Cameron and Leybourne, 2005; Leybourne and Cameron, 2006; Leybourne and Cameron, 2010) and investigates how earthquakes generate faults, reactivate existing faults, change groundwater movement, and how these interrelated to form near surface geochemical anomalies above buried mineralization.

The paper reviews the hydrology and fluid movement as a function of proximity to earthquakes.  Cameron illustrates that primary earthquakes can trigger secondary earthquakes, reactivation of existing faults, and associated hydrologic changes both proximal (i.e., near field) and also at great distances (up to 1000s of km) from the earthquake foci (i.e., far field).  For example, the M9.2 Alaskan earthquake in March 1964 resulted in changes in water levels up to 12-23 feet in water wells in the Midwest United States.

The latter review sets the stage for three case studies from Chile (Spence deposit), Nevada (Mike, Gap and Pipeline deposits), and Saskatchewan (Athabasca Basin).  The Chilean example illustrates how subduction-related earthquakes resulted in the mobilization and expelling of saline groundwaters along faults above porphyry Cu mineralization. Prior to movement along faults the groundwaters interacted with porphyry mineralization and extracted metals from the deposits resulting in Cu, Mo, Re, As, and Se enrichments in groundwater (Figure 1).  The saline groundwaters travelled along faults several hundreds of meters above mineralization and deposited salts and metals (e.g., gypsum, Cu-oxides) along the fault surfaces and within the gravel near the fault surfaces (Figure 1). This was also accompanied by the discharge of metal-rich groundwater (Figure 1).

Figure 1.  Model for the development of anomalies above buried mineralization due to the movement of groundwater during seismic events.  Saline groundwaters interact with mineralization extracting metals from buried mineralization and are released upwards during seismic events.  The interaction of these fluids with meteoric (i.e., surface waters) results in fluids enriched in metals and the deposition of mineral salts and metals (Cu, Se, Re, Mo, As) in surficial gravels 100s of meters above mineralization.  From Cameron and Leybourne (2005) and Leybourne and Cameron (2010).

The second case study comes from the Mike and Gap-Pipeline Carlin-type deposits in Nevada. These deposits are associated with seismic activity associated with Basin and Range Province crustal extension; many faults have also been reactivated by far field effects from distal earthquakes (secondary earthquakes).  Mineralization in the Mike deposit is near faults and reactivation of these faults during seismic activity has resulted fault-proximal surficial materials being enriched in elements associated with mineralization (Cu-Au) and the supergene blankets that overlie the deposit (Zn-Cd).  Similarly, the Gap and Pipeline deposits have very strong enrichments in Zn, As, and to a lesser extent Au, in the surficial materials immediately above faults and mineralization (Figure 2). In both cases reactivation of faults due to seismic activity resulted in the upward migration of mineralization-related elements in groundwaters and subsequent deposition in the near surface environment (Figure 2).

Figure 2.  Enrichments in Zn, As, and Au in soils immediately above the Gap deposit, Nevada.  The anomalies are spatially associated with both mineralization and faults that intersect the surface and sub-surface mineralization.  Diagram from Muntean & Taufen (2011) and Cameron (2013).

The final case study involves unconformity-type uranium mineralization in the Athabasca Basin, Saskatchewan.  Unconformity-type deposits are spatially associated with faults in basement rocks and often occur either in faults within basement rocks or at the contact of these faults with overlying Proterozoic Athabasca sandstones (Figure 3).  These faults not only controlled the formation of mineralization, but were also reactivated numerous times following ore formation, likely by ancient (to modern?) sesimic activity.  In both the sandstones and surficial materials along these faults are anomalous enrichments in ²⁰⁶Pb and ²⁰⁷Pb derived from the breakdown of ²³⁸U and ²³⁵U in the ores, respectively (Figure 3).  Similarly, there are enrichments along both the faults and surficial materials above mineralization of elements associated with the ores, including U, Ni, V, Co, and As.

Figure 3.  Schematic diagram showing the dispersion of material, including radiogenic lead, from Athabasca uranium ores. Diagram from Cameron (2013) with geology based on Jefferson et al. (2007).

The above case studies illustrate how long-lived faults and repeated seismic activity can result in the transfer of metals in groundwater from the subsurface to the near-surface environment.  It represents a potential method for the targeting buried mineralization, a major challenge in modern mineral exploration.

Recently published: Economic Geology Special Issue on the Pebble Porphyry Cu-Au-Mo Deposit

The May issue of Economic Geology is a special issue on the Pebble Cu-Au-Mo deposit,  located near Iliamna, Alaska, edited by Karen Kelley, James Lang, and Robert Eppinger.  The issue is the culmination of a multi-year, multi-disciplinary collaborative research project between the USGS and Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.  The deposit area has been the focus of mapping and exploration since the 1950s, but the main discoveries were in the 1980 to late 1990s by Cominco (Pebble West zone), and in the mid- to late 2000s by Northern Dynasty Minerals (Pebble East zone).  At present the deposit contains National Instrument 43-101 (NI-43-101) compliant measured and indicated resources total 5,942 million metric tons (Mt) at 0.42% Cu, 0.35 g/t Au, and 250 ppm Mo with an inferred resource of 4,835 Mt at 0.24% Cu, 0.26 g/t Au, and 215 ppm Mo (Kelley et al., 2013), and is the fifth largest porphyry deposit in terms of contained Cu and contains more Au than any other porphyry deposit.

The special issue covers quite a range of topics ranging from regional tectonics (Goldfarb et al., 2013), interpretation of aeromagnetics (Anderson et al., 2013), deposit geology and mineralization (Lang et al., 2013), geometallurgy (Gregory et al., 2013), alteration and infrared spectroscopy (Harraden et al., 2013), exploration geochemistry and deposit mineralogy (Eppinger et al., 2013), and Cu, Pb, Sr, and Nd isotope geochemistry of ores and surficial materials (Mathur et al., 2013 and Ayuso et al., 2013).

This issue is a worthwhile read for anyone interested in magmatic hydrothermal mineral deposits and the geology, geophysics, geometallurgy and exploration for porphyry Cu-Au-Mo deposits.

Classic papers in Economic Geology: Fallick et al. (2001) – Bacteria were responsible for the magnitude of the world-class hydrothermal base metal base metal sulfide deposit at Navan, Ireland

Irish-type zinc-lead deposits represent a distinctive sub-class of the carbonate-hosted zinc-lead deposit family, having geological features and genetic models that are hybrids between sedimentary exhalative (SEDEX; also known as clastic zinc-lead deposits) and Mississippi Valley-type (MVT) deposits.  They are important sources of global zinc and lead production, and the Navan Irish-type deposit (also known as the Tara deposit) has been an important contributor to global metal supply (e.g., ~105 Mt @8.1% Zn and 2%Pb; Ashton et al., 2010).

The paper by Fallick et al. (2001) in Economic Geology argued that the size of the Navan deposit was due to bacteria.  Their study utilized sulfur and lead isotopes to understand the sources of sulfur and lead in the deposit.  While there had been previous studies on sulfur isotopes in the Navan deposit (e.g., Anderson et al., 1998), these studies were focused on a limited number of samples that were texturally very coarse, and representative to only part of the ores being mined at Navan.  The study by Fallick et al. utilized concentrates from large, metallurgical bulk samples from the mine and argued that the concentrates were more statistically representative of the ore deposit than previous samples were.  The lead isotopic data for the concentrates was relatively straightforward and suggested the lead (and likely other metals) were derived from hydrothermal fluid leaching of metals from the basement rocks.  The sulfur isotopic story, in contrast, was much more interesting.

Previous sulfur isotopic work had illustrated that there were two main populations of sulfur: one population with δ³⁴S that was negative and derived from bacterial sulfate reduction of seawater sulfate (BSR); and a second population with δ³⁴S that was positive (hydrothermal) and derived from thermochemical sulfate reduction of seawater sulfate (TSR)(Anderson et al., 1998).  While the previous work illustrated there were two sources of sulfur in the deposits,  Fallick et al. quantified the proportions of bacterial versus hydrothermal sulfur in the deposit.  Their work illustrated that nearly 90% of the ores had biological sulfur signatures and that the enhanced biological activity within the Navan sedimentary basin was critical to forming the large size of the deposit.

So where do these various sulfur and lead sources fit into a model of how the deposit formed (Figure 1)?  The authors build on previous models for the generation of Irish-type (and SEDEX) deposits (e.g., Russell et al., 1981), but add very important additional constraints on deposit forming processes (Figure 1).  Hydrothermal circulation cells in an extensional environment resulted in basinal brines (bittern brines) descending and recharging through basement rocks (Figure 1A).  During this process the brines leached metals from the basement rocks (Figure 1A).  Additionally, seawater sulfate in the brine was reduced via thermochemical sulfate reduction as the brines interacted with basement rocks (Figure 1).  These processes resulted in a hydrothermal fluid that was saline, warm (90^o-270^oC; Wilkinson et al., 2010), metal-rich, with reduced hydrothermal sulfur (i.e., H₂S; Figure 1).  Coincident with hydrothermal fluid generation was ongoing bacterial sulfate reduction at the sediment-water interface within the Navan sedimentary basin, which resulted in abundant reduced sulfur (i.e., bacterial H₂S) and cool seawater (<25^oC?) to be present in pore spaces in host carbonate rocks (Figure 1).  The upwelling of the saline hydrothermal fluids along synsedimentary basement faults resulted in the mixing of the warm, metal- and hydrothermal H₂S-bearing hydrothermal fluids with the cooler, bacterial H₂S-bearing near-surface pore fluids (Figure 1B).  The mixing of these two fluids resulted in rapid cooling and dilution of the metal-bearing brine (Figure 1B), and the complexing of metals with both hydrothermal and bacterial H₂S to form the ore minerals sphalerite (ZnS) and galena (PbS):

PbCl_2(aq) + H₂S_(aq) = PbS_(s) + 2HCl_(aq) (galena formation); and

ZnCl_2(aq) + H₂S_(aq) = ZnS_(s) + 2HCl_(aq) (sphalerite formation).

Figure 1.  Generalized model for the generation of mineral deposits in the Irish  Midlands.  A)  Schematic cross section illustrating the circulation of hydrothermal fluids through basement rocks.  This circulation of fluids resulted in leaching of metals and the reduction of seawater sulfate the sulfide (H₂S) by thermochemical sulfate redution (i.e., generation of hydrothermal sulfur).  B) Three-dimensional cartoon representation of the ore forming environment with basement faults, seafloor topography, and potential mixing processes between various fluids.  C. Representation of paleogeography in the Irish Midlands with deposits (red areas) associated with fault controlled shelves/islands where strongly evaporated bittern brines could be generated.  From Wilkinson et al. (2011).

So how did bacteria result in the Navan deposit being so large?  The answer for this comes from the nature of seafloor hydrothermal vents, which the Irish-type deposits clearly were (e.g., Boyce et al., 1983). Hydrothermal vents are extremely inefficient at forming sulfide mineralization.  In fact, the majority of metals present in hydrothermal vents go “up in smoke” and are not precipitated as sulfides within the sulfide chimneys (e.g., Converse et al., 1984).   One of the major reasons for this is that the hydrothermal vent fluids are generally deficient in the H₂S required to precipitate the metals as sulfide minerals that form sulphide chimneys (e.g., sphalerite, galena, pyrite, chalcopyrite). In the case of Navan, there was abundant bacterial H₂S present at the site of deposition; therefore, much of the metal that would normally go “up in smoke” complexed with the bacterial H₂S and formed sulfide mineralization.  Therefore, without bacterial sulfate reduction and bacteria present in the Navan sedimentary basin it is likely the Navan deposit would have been a much smaller deposit!

The paper is also a great example of how a title can have great impact on the reader.  Furthermore, this paper has one of the best lines at the end of the abstract that explains the essence of the manuscript: “…..no bacteria, no giant ore deposit.”  A great example of impact-oriented writing.

Sedimentary origin of gold and uranium in the Archean Witwatersrand Supergroup, South Africa

New research by Depiné et al. published in Mineralium Deposita provides critical evidence to the origin of gold and uranium in the Archean Witwatersrand Supergroup in South Africa. The Witwaterstrand Basin in South Africa accounts for 40% of the world’s gold and is a critical source of uranium for the the planet (Frimmell, 2008).   There are two competing models for the origin of the gold and uranium in the Witwatersrand.  The first model, the paleoplacer model, suggests that the gold and uranium were derived from weathering of Archean basement rocks, and subsequently deposited as detrital grains in conglomerates (i.e., a paleoplacer model; Minter, 1999).  The second model suggests that the uranium and gold were deposited after conglomerate deposition and were introduced by hydrothermal fluids (i.e., hydrothermal model; Phillips and Powell, 2011).

Depiné et al. utilize a combination of petrography, scanning electron microscope (SEM), electron microprobe, and laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry of  uraninite grains that are associated with gold to provide support for a detrital origin for both the uraninite and gold in the Witwatersrand Basin.  Depiné et al.  utilize these techniques to show that the gold and uranium were deposited together, and they also obtain mineral chemical data, including rare earth element (REE) data, on uraninite grains associated with gold.  Their work builds on the work of Mercadier et al., who recently illustrated that uraninite derived from different sources have distinct rare earth element signatures.  In particular, Mercadier’s work illustrates that deposits formed from igneous sources have higher REE contents than those from hydrothermal sources.

Depiné et al.’s work illustrate that REE in uraninites from Witwatersrand have very high REE concentrations consistent with formation from high temperature, igneous sources, and have values that are much higher than hydrothermally derived uraninite (Figure 1).  Furthermore, the uraninite have enrichments in elements commonly associated with magmatic activity (e.g., Bi, W; Figure 2).  These features suggest that the uraninite are unlikely of hydrothermal origin, but were derived from igneous sources.

Figure 1.  Concentration of rare earth elements versus the light rare earth element(LREE) to heavy rare earth element (HREE) ratio.  Notably the Witwatersrand uraninites have very high REE and are indicative of a high temperature origin.  From Depiné et al. (2013).

Figure 2. Coloured element maps of various elements for grains of uraninite from Witwatersrand.  Note that the grains have enrichments in Bi and W, two elements commonly associated with igneous activity.  From Depiné et al. (2013).

The occurrence of uraninite in the conglomerate units with igneous sources is consistent with the uraninite, and by association gold, being derived from weathering of Archean igneous basement rocks and subsequent deposition in conglomerate beds.  Assuming that the work of Mercadier et al. holds up to further tests, it implies that the paleoplacer model for the Witwatersrand is the best model to explain gold and uranium enrichment in this important mining district.