Next Article in Journal
Post-Magmatic Fluids Dominate the Mineralization of Dolomite Carbonatitic Dykes Next to the Giant Bayan Obo REE Deposit, Northern China
Next Article in Special Issue
Mechanism and Influencing Factors of REY Enrichment in Deep-Sea Sediments
Previous Article in Journal
A New Belt Ore Image Segmentation Method Based on the Convolutional Neural Network and the Image-Processing Technology
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Minerals
Volume 10
Issue 12
10.3390/min10121116
minerals-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Geochemical and Geochronological Constraints on the Genesis of Ion-Adsorption-Type REE Mineralization in the Lincang Pluton, SW China

by
Lei Lu
1,2,
Yan Liu
3,4,*,
Huichuan Liu
5,*,
Zhi Zhao
2,
Chenghui Wang
2 and
Xiaochun Xu
1
1
School of Resources and Environmental Engineering, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei 230009, China
2
MLR Key Laboratory of Metallogeny and Mineral Resource Assessment, Institute of Mineral Resources, Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, Beijing 100037, China
3
Southern Marine Science and Engineering Guangdong Laboratory (Guangzhou), Guangzhou 511458, China
4
Key Laboratory of Deep-Earth Dynamics of Ministry of Natural Resources, Institute of Geology, Chinese Academy of Geological Science, Beijing 100037, China
5
State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing 102249, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Minerals 2020, 10(12), 1116; https://doi.org/10.3390/min10121116
Submission received: 3 November 2020 / Revised: 26 November 2020 / Accepted: 2 December 2020 / Published: 12 December 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Economic Potential and Characteristics of REE Deposits and Other Critical Raw Materials)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Granites are assumed to be the main source of heavy rare-earth elements (HREEs), which have important applications in modern society. However, the geochemical and petrographic characteristics of such granites need to be further constrained, especially as most granitic HREE deposits have undergone heavy weathering. The LC batholith comprises both fresh granite and ion-adsorption-type HREE deposits, and contains four main iRee (ion-adsorption-type REE) deposits: the Quannei (QN), Shangyun (SY), Mengwang (MW), and Menghai (MH) deposits, which provide an opportunity to elucidate these characteristics The four deposits exhibit light REE (LREE) enrichment, and the QN deposit is also enriched in HREEs. The QN and MH deposits were chosen for study of their petrology, mineralogy, geochemistry, and geochronology to improve our understanding of the formation of iRee deposits. The host rock of the QN and MH deposits is granite that includes REE accessory minerals, with monazite, xenotime, and allanite occurring as euhedral inclusions in feldspar and biotite, and thorite, fluorite(–Y), and REE fluorcarbonate occurring as anhedral filling in cavities in quartz and feldspar. Zircon U–Pb dating analysis of the QN (217.8 ± 1.7 Ma, MSWD = 1.06; and 220.3 ± 1.2 Ma, MSWD = 0.71) and MH (232.2 ± 1.7 Ma, MSWD = 0.58) granites indicates they formed in Late Triassic, with this being the upper limit of the REE-mineral formation age. The host rock of the QN and MH iRee deposits is similar to most LC granites, with high A/CNK ratios (>1.1) and strongly peraluminous characteristics similar to S-type granites. The LC granites (including the QN and MH granites) have strongly fractionated REE patterns (LREE/HREE = 1.89–11.97), negative Eu anomalies (Eu/Eu* = 0.06–0.25), and are depleted in Nb, Zr, Hf, P, Ba, and Sr. They have high 87Sr/86Sr ratios (0.710194–0.751763) and low 143Nd/144Nd ratios (0.511709–0.511975), with initial Sr and Nd isotopic compositions of (87Sr/86Sr)i = 0.72057–0.72129 and εNd(220 Ma) = −9.57 to −9.75. Their initial Pb isotopic ratios are: 206Pb/204Pb = 18.988–19.711; 208Pb/204Pb = 39.713–40.216; and 207Pb/204Pb = 15.799–15.863. The Sr–Nd–Pb isotopic data and TDM2 ages suggest that the LC granitic magma had a predominantly crustal source. The REE minerals are important features of these deposits, with feldspars and micas altering to clay minerals containing Ree3+ (exchangeable REE), whose concentration is influenced by the intensity of weathering; the stronger the chemical weathering, the more REE minerals are dissolved. Secondary mineralization is also a decisive factor for Ree3+ enrichment. Stable geology within a narrow altitudinal range of 300–600 m enhances Ree3+ retention.

1. Introduction

Rare-earth elements (REEs) are currently a focus of global attention because of geopolitical controls on their supply, which have led to them being included in current lists of critical metals. Their importance is due to their use in high-strength magnets, which are fundamental to a range of low-carbon energy-production approaches, and in a wide range of high-technology applications [1]. REE production is currently limited to a small number of large deposits (e.g., Bayan Obo, Baotou, China; Mountain Pass, San Bernardino County, CA, USA; Mount Weld, Laverton, Australia; Lovozero, Russia [2,3,4,5]), by-products (e.g., mineral sands in India), or deposits enriched with specific elements of current high demand, such as Dy, Tb, and other heavy REEs (HREEs, e.g., the so-called ion-adsorption-type REE deposits in weathered granite in southern China [6]).
Ion–adsorption-type REE (iRee) deposits supply most of the world’s REE requirements, particularly HREEs. Such deposits are often informally referred to as ‘South China clays,’ but similar systems have been recognized recently in Southeast Asia, Madagascar, and the southeastern USA, where deposits are generally enriched in light REEs (LREEs [6,7,8,9,10,11,12]). In China, iRee deposits are distributed mainly in the southeast, although exploration in other areas is ongoing. The Quannei (QN) iRee deposit, which is typically enriched in LREEs and partly enriched in HREEs, is in the Lincang (LC) area of Yunnan Province, SW China, and has an altitudinal range of 1500–2000 m. In this area, four comparable deposits have been identified recently in the LC granite: the QN, Shangyun (SY), Mengwang (MW), and Menghai (MH) iRee deposits. Both fresh and weathered granites occur in the LC area, providing an opportunity to study the effect of weathering on ion-adsorption-type HREE (iHRee) deposits. The elevation of iRee deposits (>1000 m) in SW China are higher than those in SE China, showing that there is an exploring potential of iRee (especially iHRee) deposit in high elevation areas (>1000 m) [10,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23].
It is generally accepted that REEs are mobilized and fractionated during intense weathering of granite under warm and humid conditions [7,12,24,25,26,27,28,29]. Rare-earth element-bearing minerals (‘REE minerals’) are essential to the formation of iRee deposits. Moreover, fluids (organics and inorganics) also display an important role in the mobilization and accumulation of REE [30]. In host rocks, REEs occur isomorphously in the lattices of minerals such as feldspar, biotite, and apatite, or independently in minerals such as allanite, monazite, and xenotime [12]. Dissolution of these minerals is the first stage of the formation of iRee deposits, with clay being the predominant secondary mineral in which REEs are accommodated [7,24,25,26]. Under natural pH conditions, REEs are adsorbed on clay minerals with negatively charged layers through ion exchange, electrostatic attraction, and surface complexation, migrating into the clay structure [12]. Stable geological and tectonic conditions with a narrow altitudinal range (300–600 m) may be beneficial for retention of REEs in weathering crust [19,24,27,29,31,32].
Despite previous studies of the formation of iRee deposits, the geochemical and petrographic characteristics of granite in such deposits require further constraints. The present study focused on the geochemical characteristics of host granites in the LC area with a view to (i) determine the magma source of the host rock of iRee deposits; (ii) distinguish REE minerals in the host rock; (iii) elucidate the geodynamic mechanism of the host rock generation; and (iv) explain the REE mineralization process in weathering profiles.

2. Study Areas and Sampling

2.1. Geological Background

The LC batholith and the Triassic volcanic belt constitute the southern Lancangjiang zone of SW China. The southern Lancangjiang tectonic zone in the central part of the Sanjiang orogenic belt includes the Jinsha, Lancang, and Nu rivers. The Lanping–Simao Block and Jinshajiang–Ailaoshan suture lie east of the Sanjiang orogenic belt, which represents a Paleo-Tethyan block–arc oceanic basin. The Changning–Menglian suture belt is a remnant of the main Paleo–Tethyan ocean crust in SW China and extends to the south of the Nan and Sr Kaeo sutures.
The LC batholith intrudes the Lancang, Damenglong, and Chongshan groups. The Lancang Group comprises sandstones, mudstones, slates, phyllites, minor chlorite schists, and blueschists. The Danmenglong and Chongshan groups comprise banded gneiss, quartz–feldspathic-mica schist, amphibolite, migmatite, and marble. These three groups are considered to represent Proterozoic basement and have undergone several stages of metamorphism and deformation [33,34,35].

2.2. The Lincang Granitic Batholith

The LC batholith comprises different types of granitic rock with an area of over 7400 km2, and measures 350 km long by 10–48 km wide. It extends from Yunxian county in the north to Menghai county in the south, with intermittent southward connection to Thailand, the Malay Peninsula, and Sumatra granites (Figure 1a,b). The exposed area represents the largest batholith in Yunnan and is separated into three segments by the Xiaojie–Nadong and Nanling–Chengzi faults (Figure 1c). The altitude of the LC batholith is in the range of 1000–2500 m, with the topography of the region dominated by low hills of 300–600 m in height. Denudation rates are fairly low and weathering profiles are well preserved. The region has a temperate subtropical monsoon climate with an annual-average temperature, rainfall, and humidity of 17.3 °C, 1504.5 mm, and 72.54%, respectively [33].
Four iRee deposits have been recognized in the weathering crust of LC granites, and are distributed in the central and southern areas of the batholith. The QN and SY deposits are in the central part of the batholith, and the MH and MW deposits in the southern area (Figure 1c). The parent rock of the QN deposit (QN granite) is sandwiched between the Tanyao and Jianshitou faults, granodiorite intrudes in the east, and the western area contains light-colored granite. The area of SY, MW, and MH deposits are bounded by the lowest industrial-grade of REE content (REE = 0.05–0.1%) in the weathering crust. The four medium–large-sized deposits have similar mineralization systems with LREE enrichment and host rocks of biotite granite.

2.3. Sampling and Methods

2.3.1. Sampling

As shown in Figure 1c, four QN granite samples (lc2-j2, lc2-j3, lc3-j1, and lc4-j1) were taken from the QN iRee deposit in the central LC batholith, and one MH granite sample (mh-j1) from the MH iRee deposit in the southern batholith. The corresponding granite weathering profile was separated to three horizons, A, B, and C. Horizon A, the upper weathering profile, comprises mainly soil and organic matter with some detrital quartz. Horizon B comprises weathered granite, with most minerals being altered to secondary minerals, such as clay, oxides, and phosphates. This sample contains K-feldspar and detrital quartz, and was crushed easily by hand. Horizon C represents a weathering zone where the sample was sandier and stonier than horizon B, and could be crushed by a hammer. Sample numbers in each weathering profile followed Lu et al. (2019, 2020) [28,29].

2.3.2. Methods

Whole rock major and trace element compositions were determined at the National research center of Geoanalysis, Beijing, China (NRCG, CAGS). Major elements of the analyses were determined by X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (XRF) using fused glass discs, with precisions of 1–2%. Trace element analyses were determined by inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) (PE-300D).
Chemical compositions of minerals in the granites from the LC granite were determined by a JEOL-8230 electronmicroprobe at the Key Laboratory of Metallogeny and Mineral Assessment, Institute of Mineral Resources, Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, Beijing. Trace elements of minerals were carried out by fs-LA-ICP-MS, using a femto-second laser ablation system (ASI J200) coupled to an inductively-coupled mass spectrometer (Thermo X series II).
Meanwhile, the zircon U-Pb age and Sr-Nd-Pb isotope of LC granite were examined. Measurements of U, Th, and Pb isotopes of zircon grains were conducted using a Camera IMS–1280HR SIMS at the Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing. Sr-Nd and Pb isotope analyses were performed on a Neptune Plus MC-ICP-MS (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Dreieich, Germany) at the Wuhan Sample Solution Analytical Technology Co., Ltd, Hubei, China. For the details on the analysis methods, we refer to the Supplementary Materials.

3. Petrography

3.1. Petrographic Characteristics of LC Granite

The granite samples are all biotite granite, barring sample lc2-j2, which is granodiorite. Granodioritic xenoliths occur in the monzonitic granites at several locations (Figure 2A). The biotite granite has either a medium–coarse-grained (samples lc4-j1) or medium–fine-grained (samples lc2-j3, lc3-j1, and mh-j1) texture.
Granodiorite lc2-j2 (Figure 2A,a) has a porphyritic medium–coarse-grained structure and comprises mainly plagioclase (An28–36; 28–32%), biotite (27–29%), quartz (16–20%), and K-feldspar (8–10%). These rock-forming minerals have similar grain sizes of 0.1–1 mm. Accessory minerals include minor magnetite (0.1–0.3%), apatite (1–2%), and zircon (0.5–1%; Figure 3a).
Biotite granite lc4-j1 (Figure 2B,c,d) has a porphyritic, medium–coarse-grained structure and comprises K-feldspar (20–40%), plagioclase (25–40%), quartz (20–30%), and biotite (4–8%). Phenocrysts include K-feldspar (5–25%) with grain sizes of 0.5–10 cm. The matrix comprises K-feldspar, plagioclase, quartz, and biotite, with grain sizes of 1–5 mm. Mineral crystals are subhedral–anhedral. The K-feldspar comprises microcline and perthite, the former of which has a cross-hatched twin texture and the latter a perthitic texture. Plagioclase is mainly andesine (An28–36) with carlsbad twinning and a zoned texture. Alteration in the granite includes chloritization, epidotization, and sericitization, with biotite replaced by chlorite (ink-blue interference color; Figure 2d), and the central part of plagioclase replaced by epidote or sericite (Figure 2d,g). Accessory minerals include ilmenite (0.2–0.5%), sphene (0.2–0.3%), epidote (3–5%), apatite (or fluorapatite, 1–2%), allanite (1–2%), monazite (0.5–1%), zircon (0.5–1%), and pyrite (0.3–0.5%). Accessory minerals occur as euhedral crystals barring allanite, which is anhedral.
The biotite granites lc2-j3, lc3-j1, and mh-j1 (Figure 2A,C,D,b,e–h) comprise plagioclase (31–42%, including oligoclase (An15–20) and albite (An0–6)); K-feldspar (19–35% microcline); quartz (20–34%), and mica (including 4–6% biotite and 0.2–3% muscovite), all with grain sizes of 0.5–2 mm. Accessory minerals include epidote (0.5–1%), apatite (or fluorapatite, 0.2–0.5%), and zircon (0.6–1%). Quartz, albite, and muscovite contents are higher than those of the granite, and the allanite content lower, but REE minerals such as fluorite(–Y) and REE fluorcarbonate occur. Alteration includes silicification (Figure 2g), albitization (Figure 2e), and muscovitization, with biotite replaced and altered to muscovite (Figure 2f). Fluorapatite is associated with monazite, thorite, and xenotime. Most REE minerals occur as anhedral crystals filling fissures in fluorapatite (Figure 3b,i). Allanite(–Y) is associated with fluorite(–Y) and REE fluorcarbonates that fill fissures between plagioclase and quartz.

3.2. REE Minerals

In the LC granite, REEs are concentrated in accessory minerals such as sphene, apatite, and zircon, or occur as independent REE minerals such as monazite, xenotime, and allanite. Sphene, apatite, zircon, monazite, and xenotime occur as subhedral–euhedral crystals associated with quartz, feldspar, and mica (biotite and muscovite) (Figure 3a,d,e,g,h), whereas allanite, monazite, fluorite(–Y) and REE fluorcarbonate occur as anhedral crystals (Figure 3b,c,g–i). In our samples, different mineral assemblages are observed in each type of granite. For example, in granodiorite lc2-j2, accessory minerals are ilmenite, sphene, apatite, and zircon with minor monazite and xenotime; in the medium–coarse-grained biotite granites lc4-j1 (Figure 3d,e,g,h), allanite is associated with monazite, apatite, and zircon, fluorapatite contents are higher, and monazite, thorite, and zircon occur as anhedral crystals filling fissures (Figure 3b,c); in the medium–fine-grained biotite granite (lc3-j1) of REE mineral are present, such as allanite(–Y), fluorite(–Y), and REE fluorcarbonate (Figure 3f,i).
The REE concentrations for each REE mineral are listed in Table 1. The accessory minerals allanite, monazite, and xenotime have relatively high REE contents (>5 wt.%). Based on their LREE/HREE ratios, REE minerals can be divided into two categories: LREE-type and HREE-type. For example, allanite and monazite are relatively enriched in LREE (LREE/HREE > 1) and are therefore ‘LREE minerals,’ whereas xenotime and fluorite(–Y) are relatively enriched in HREE, and are therefore ‘HREE minerals.’
Allanite, monazite, apatite, and zircon are the main accessory minerals in the LC granite, with minor cerite and xenotime associated with feldspar and quartz. In medium–fine-grained biotite granite (lc3-j1), allanite(–Y) is an HREE mineral with Y2O3 contents of up to 30 wt.%. More fluorapatites are found. Monazite and thorite have been re-crystallized and occur as anhedral fillings in fissures in fluorapatite which increasing the REE contents to up to 8.46 wt.%. The REE fluorcarbonates associated with fluorite(–Y) that fill fractures or crystal cleavages in quartz and plagioclase (Figure 3f,i) are LREE minerals, but have high Dy2O3 and Y2O3 contents of up to 4.6 wt.% and 16.6 wt.%, respectively.

3.3. Weathering Profile of the LC Granite

It is generally considered that weathering crusts are formed by the weathering of granite in a humid environment, with the crust comprising detrital and secondary minerals. Detrital minerals can be subdivided into two groups: (1) quartz, feldspar, and biotite; and (2) heavy minerals that are relatively stable during weathering, such as zircon, monazite, and xenotime. The REE minerals such as allanite, fluorapatite, fluorite, and fluorcarbonate may occur in host rocks, but not in the weathering crust.
Secondary minerals carrying exchangeable REE (Ree3+) include clay minerals and Fe–Mn oxides. Here, the secondary-mineral content of the LC weathering profile ranges from 21% to 33%, from top to bottom. The clay mineral content is highest in horizon A, with most clay minerals finally altering to gibbsite (~7%) in this horizon [28,29]. Horizon B is the most important for Ree3+ enrichment. Kaolinite, montmorillonite, and illite are the main clay minerals in the LC granite weathering profile. The proportion of clay minerals varies between horizons based on the intensity of weathering. The horizon A kaolinite content is up to 85%, with 4% illite and 5% vermiculite. Horizon B contains 74–81% kaolinite, 9% illite, and 8–17% montmorillonite (mixed with illite). Horizon C contains 36% kaolinite, 12% illite, and 13% chlorite [29].

4. Results

4.1. Geochemistry of the QN Granite

Results of geochemical analysis of representative samples of the QN and MH granites are listed in Table 2. The average loss on ignition was <1.5 wt.%. The samples have high SiO2 (62.67–75.12 wt.%) and K2O (4.45–4.85 wt.%) contents; low MgO (0.39–0.87 wt.%) and FeOt (total Fe oxides; 1.71–6.44 wt.%) contents; and MnO and P2O5 contents of 0.05–0.07 wt.% and 0.05–0.07 wt.%, respectively. Their K2O/Na2O ratios of 0.88–2.36 indicate that the QN and MH granites are high-K calc-alkaline series rocks (Figure 4a, b). Their peraluminous nature is indicated by A/CNK ratios (mol. Al2O3/(CaO + K2O + Na2O)) of generally >1.1 (Figure 4c). In the ternary classification diagram (Figure 5), the samples plot within the S-type granite field (with one exception in the I-type field), close to the boundary of the A-type field. In the Harker diagrams (Figure 6), FeO, MgO, TiO2, CaO, MnO, and P2O5 contents exhibit strong negative correlations with SiO2 content. Five samples (lc2-j2, lc2-j3, lc3-j1, lc4-j1, and mh-j1) have REE contents of 212–749 ppm with similar chondrite-normalized REE patterns that are relatively enriched in LREEs (LREE/HREE = 1.89–7.74), and obvious negative Eu anomalies (Eu/Eu* = 0.14–0.2). The Eu/Eu* ratios are negatively related to HREE contents. The sample lc3-j1 with the highest REE content exhibits a notable negative Ce anomaly (Figure 7a). Five samples are enriched in large-ion lithophile elements, and display negative Ba, Nb, Sr, Zr, Hf, and Ti anomalies in primitive-mantle-normalized trace-element spidergrams (Figure 7b).

4.2. Zircon U–Pb Dating

Zircons from the QN porphyritic biotite granite sample (lc4-j1) are predominantly yellow to colorless euhedral crystals, 50–150 μm long with aspect ratios of 1–3, and exhibit oscillatory magmatic zoning in cathodoluminescence (CL) images. Their U and Th contents are 117–21,152.8 and 69–28,873 ppm, respectively, with Th/U ratios of 0.19–1.36, which is typical of magmatic zircons. Twenty analyses yielded concordant 206Pb/238U ages of 231.4–215.2 Ma, with a weighted-mean age of 220.3 ± 1.2 Ma (mean squared weighted deviation, MSWD = 0.71), which is interpreted as the crystallization age of the central part of the LC batholith (Table 3; Figure 8a,b).
Zircons from biotite granite lc2-j3 are a similar color to those of sample lc4-j1, with lengths of 50–200 μm and aspect ratios of 1.5–2.5, and magmatic oscillatory zoning in CL images. Their U and Th contents are 107–4335 and 48–1146 ppm, respectively, with Th/U ratios of 0.05–1.59. The 12 youngest ages are concordant with a weighted-mean 206Pb/238U age of 217.8 ± 1.7 Ma (MSWD = 1.06). Older ages were obtained from cores and xenocrysts. Three analysis yielded Concordia 206Pb/238U ages of 443.1 ± 13.9 to 384.7 ± 12.1 Ma, and 10 analyses yield ages of 1575.1 ± 45.0 to 509.0 ± 15.8 Ma (Table 3; Figure 8c,d).
Zircons from the MH biotite granite mh-j1 are similar to the QN zircons and are yellow to colorless, with lengths of 50–250 μm and aspect ratios of 1–4, and magmatic oscillatory zoning in CL images. Their U and Th contents are 98–709 and 16–294 ppm, respectively, with Th/U ratios of 0.18–0.85. One xenocryst analysis yielded a 206Pb/238U age of 410.6 ± 13.2 Ma. Four other xenocryst analyses yielded 206Pb/238U ages of 1015.1 ± 30.0 to 902.4 ± 26.8 Ma, possibly indicating the existence of early Proterozoic basement in the region, similar to that in the Yangtze Block [48,49]. These ages suggest that the petrogenesis of the LC granite was associated with anatexis of crustal materials. The 19 youngest analyses are concordant, with a weighted-mean age of 232.2 ± 1.7 Ma (MSWD = 0.58; Table 3; Figure 8e,f).

4.3. Sr–Nd–Pb Isotopic Compositions

Results of whole-rock Sr–Nd isotope analyses of the QN and MH granites are shown in Table 4 and plotted in the εNd(t)–(87Sr/86Sr) diagram (Figure 9a). The QN and MH granites have variable 87Sr/86Sr ratios of 0.733459–0.733626, and 143Nd/144Nd ratios of 0.511982–0.511990. Their initial Sr and Nd isotopic compositions are indicated by (87Sr/86Sr)i = 0.72057–0.72129 and εNd(232 Ma) = −9.57 to −9.75.
The initial Pb isotopic compositions of the QN and MH granites are moderately radiogenic, with isotopic ratios of 206Pb/204Pb = 18.988–19.711, 208Pb/204Pb = 39.713–40.216, and 207Pb/204Pb = 15.799–15.863. In (207Pb/204Pb)–(206Pb/204Pb) diagrams (Table 5; Figure 9b), the LC granites are clustered towards the upper-crust field.

5. Discussion

5.1. The Timing of REE Mineralization in the LC Granite

Previously published ages for the LC granite have generally been in the range of 252–199 Ma (e.g., [17,18,19,33,40,41,42,43,44,45,50,51]; Figure 10). Our zircon U–Pb dating in the central LC batholith, which contains HREE mineralization, yielded an age of ca. 220.3 Ma, and zircons from the southern area yielded an age of ca. 233.2 Ma, both of which are within this range, suggesting that the main LC granitic body intruded during the middle–late Triassic.
Zircon usually crystallizes during the early stages of rock formation and can survive temperatures as high as 3000 °C. Zircon U–Pb ages may, therefore, reflect those of their host granite [52]. However, REE minerals such as monazite, allanite, and xenotime crystallize later in granite than zircon. Furthermore, the types and amounts of REE mineral (including HREE minerals) increase with hydrothermal alteration after crystallization being [30,53]. Hence, zircon U–Pb ages should be considered upper limits of the REE-mineralization age; i.e., 220.3 Ma in the QN granite, and 233.2 Ma in the MH granite.

5.2. Petrogenesis and Tectonic Setting of the LC Pluton

The decrease in FeOt, MgO, TiO2, CaO, MnO, and P2O5 contents of the LC granites with increasing SiO2 content suggests that the magmas underwent continuous crystallization during magmatic evolution, and their peraluminous nature (A/CNK > 1.1) indicates S-type affinity (Section 4.1; Figure 4, Figure 5c, and Figure 6; [54,55,56,57,58]). Geochemical, isotopic, and petrological constraints confirm that most large-volume peraluminous granites originate from the melting of crustal rocks (e.g., [54]). Here, the strong negative Eu, Ba, Nb, Sr, P, and Ti anomalies, and positive Rb, Th, and U anomalies of the LC granite are similar to those of magma derived from the partial melting of crustal rocks [56,59].
S-type granites are produced mainly from the melting of metasediments such as psammite and pelite [60], and their CaO/Na2O ratios are influenced by their magma source. The CaO/Na2O ratios in psammite-derived melt are generally > 0.3 (average 0.8), whereas in pelite-derived melt the ratios are <0.5 [54]. Here, most LC granite samples have CaO/Na2O ratios of 0.06–2.67 (n = 147), with only 21 samples having ratios of <0.5, and Al2O3/TiO2 ratios of 9.29–150.9, with only four samples having ratios of >79. In the (CaO/Na2O)–(Al2O3/TiO2) diagram (Figure 10a), most samples plot in the field of psammite-derived melt. The Rb/Ba and Rb/Sr ratios in psammite-derived melt are lower than those in pelite-derived melt [56]. In the (Rb/Ba)–(Rb/Sr) diagram ([61]; Figure 10b), most LC granite samples plot close to the psammite-derived melt field, with such melt having a clay-poor source, including minor shale. Some samples plot near the clay-rich field with a mixed source dominated by quartz-feldspathic psammites. In the (Al2O3/(MgO + FeOt))–(CaO/(MgO + FeOT)) diagram (Figure 10c), most samples plot in the field of psammite-derived melt. Furthermore, Sr and Eu are enriched mainly in plagioclase, whereas K-feldspar is enriched in Ba. The strong negative Eu, Ba, and Sr anomalies in LC granite samples indicate that plagioclase and K-feldspar are the main residual phase in partial melting. In the (Rb/Sr)–Ba diagram (Figure 10d), most LC granite samples plot with 20–60% plagioclase, suggesting that at least 20–60% plagioclase was present in the magma source [54,55]. It follows that the parental magma source for the LC granites involved mainly quartz-feldspathic materials such as psammite-dominated clastic metasediments, with minor shales.
The high initial 87Sr/86Sr ratios, low εNd(231 Ma) values and Pb isotopic compositions, consistent with the isotopic composition of the field of remelting granites of SCB (South China Block; [62]; Figure 9), indicates that the LC granitic magma was derived from partial melting of ancient crystallized basement.
The compositions of the Changning–Menglian suture belt in the Lancangjiang zone of SW China, the Chiang Mai–Inthanon suture belt in northern Thailand, and the Bentong–Raub suture belt in the Malay Peninsula indicate that the Paleo-Tethys Ocean opened in the early Devonian and closed in the Middle–Late Triassic [33,34,40,41,42,43,63,64,65]. The LC batholith, exposed to the east of the Changning–Menglian suture zone, represents a tectono-magmatic zone that records the evolution of the Paleo-Tethys Ocean from subduction to post-collisional regimes [41,64].
The LC granite exhibits peraluminous and S-type characteristics and, with psammite-derived upper-crustal melt being the main source of S-type granites, some studies have concluded that the LC batholith formed in a syn-collisional setting [33,51,55,56,57]. This is supported by most LC granites being peraluminous (Figure 5c) and plotting in the volcanic arc and syn-collision fields in the Nb–Y diagram (Figure 11a). Peralkaline and alkaline granites are commonly associated with post-tectonic within-plate extension [55]. In the SiO2–K2O diagram (Figure 5a), most LC granite samples plot in the peralkaline and alkaline fields, while in the Rb–(Y+Nb) diagram (Figure 11c), all but one plot in the post-collision field, consistent with a post-collision tectonic setting. Our zircon U–Pb ages of 233.2–217.8 Ma from the LC granite are consistent with those found in most other studies (252–199 Ma), and the common absence of Early Triassic strata in the Lancangjiang zone reflects pronounced uplift and erosion at that time [33,40]. Moreover, in the Rb–(Y+Ta) diagram (Figure 11b), all LC granites plot in the within-plate granite field, indicating a within-plate extensional environment. Experimental studies have demonstrated that bimodal igneous suites comprising mafic members of tholeiitic gabbros and basalts, and felsic members displaying A-type characteristics, are common in such a setting [37,40,66]. We, therefore, conclude that closure of the Paleo-Tethys Ocean at ca. 295 Ma was followed by syn-collisional extension accompanied by crustal melting and a degree of mantle-material ascent, with magmatism occurring mainly at ca. 199 Ma within a post-collision extensional environment. The LC granite, thus, originated from the partial melting of early Paleozoic crustal basement.

5.3. Key Factors in REE Mineralization

5.3.1. Rare-Earth Element Minerals

Surface water and groundwater may contain little Ree3+, and bedrock is considered the main source of iRee deposits [24,25,26]. The Nangling (NL) granites are the host rocks for most iRee deposits in SE China, and in both the NL and LC granites, accessory rare-earth element (REE) minerals are critical for the formation of iRee deposits [7,24,25,26,27]. However, fewer types and lower quantities of REE minerals occur in the LC granite than in, for example, the Zudong and Longnan granites that are enriched in prisite (–Y), bastnaesite, samarskite, eschynite, monazite, and allanite. The behavior of REE minerals during chemical weathering is a critical factor that affects the accumulation and differentiation of REEs in the weathering profile. Minerals in weathering crust can be divided into three groups: (1) strongly stable during chemical weathering; e.g., quartz, monazite, xenotime, and zircon; (2) moderately stable during weathering; e.g., feldspar, biotite, apatite, and allanite; and (3) weakly stable during weathering; e.g., fluorite(–Y) and REE fluorcarbonate [7,24,25,26,27].
REE minerals are the main source of iRee deposits in the LC granite. Although feldspar, biotite, sphene, and apatite have low REE contents, weathering cycles may result in these minerals contributing to the deposit. Minerals in granites enriched in LREEs contribute to iLRee deposits when they are dissolved in the weathering crust. Allanite(–Y), fluorite(–Y), and REE fluorcarbonate are relatively enriched in HREEs, and are the main HREE source for iRee deposits. However, HREE minerals are not common in the LC granite. The QN granites, for example, are mainly enriched in LREEs, with relatively few exhibiting HREE enrichment, leading to QN deposits being rich in LREEs, but with a degree of HREE enrichment. The HREE minerals are scarce in MH granite, so the MH deposit is enriched with LREEs only.

5.3.2. Secondary Minerals

Rock-forming minerals such as feldspar and mica (biotite and muscovite) are altered to clay minerals during weathering and become carriers of Ree3+ [7,24,25,26,27,28,29,69]. Clay minerals such as those of the kaolin-group (kaolinite, dickite, nacrite, and halloysite), illite, and montmorillonite, which adsorb Ree3+, can also be considered as iRee ores. This study found that kaolinite, illite, and montmorillonite are the main clay minerals in the LC granite weathering profile, while halloysite also occurs in the NL weathering profile.
The REE adsorption capacity is influenced by surface structure, composition, and surface charge of clay minerals [31]. Illite and montmorillite occur in 2:1 clays, with higher adsorption capacities than kaolin-group minerals in 1:1 clays. The high adsorption capacity of montmorillonite is due to negative charges generated by isomorphism in the lattice, whereas kaolinite and halloysite have negative charges where –OH in the crystal lattice releases H+. The higher the pH, the higher the adsorption capacity [31,68,69]. The pH points of zero charge (pHpzc) of kaolinite, illite, and montmorillonite are <3.7, ~2.5, and 7–9, respectively [70], so under natural pH conditions (4–7), kaolin-group minerals (especially kaolinite and halloysite) and illite are more capable of surface complexation of Ree3+ than montmorillonite [32,69]. In both the LC and NL areas, the kaolin-group represents the predominant clay minerals in the weathering profile, providing enrichment in Ree3+. In the appropriate pH range, the deposit’s Ree3+ content, thus, depends on the amount of kaolin-group minerals in the weathering profile.
Horizon B of the granite weathering profile has the highest Ree3+ content, owing to its pH range of 4–6.8 and higher kaolinite and/or halloysite content. In the LC area, horizon B contains an average of 21–26% clay minerals [29], whereas in the NL area the clay-mineral content is up to 50% [24,25,26,32]. In the NL weathering profile, the content of kaolinite decreases but that of halloysite increases with depth, with both clay minerals contributing to the accumulation and fractionation of REEs at pH 5.5–6.3 [32]. The higher Ree3+ content of the NL weathering profile than that of the LC profile is, therefore, likely related to its higher kaolinite and halloysite contents.

5.3.3. Intensity of Granite Weathering

The Ree3+ content of the weathering profile is influenced by the intensity of granite weathering; the stronger the weathering, the more REE minerals are dissolved, and the more Ree3+ is released to the profile. The LC weathering profile has a lower REE content than the NL profile: 134–1111 ppm (mean 447 ppm; n = 77) and 168–2347 ppm (mean 572 ppm; n = 70), respectively, and the difference may be due to the relative intensities of weathering. In the NL area, the chemical index of alteration (CIA; 100 × Al2O3/(Al2O3 + CaO + Na2O + K2O)) of granite and the weathering profile are in the ranges of 45–60% and 65–95%, respectively, with the REE content increasing with CIA in the range 45–60%, but decreasing in the CIA range of 65–95% [27]. The CIA of LC granite and weathering profile are similar to the NL profile (Figure 12a, b).
The intensity of weathering can also be reflected in the amounts and types of secondary minerals in the horizon. In natural chemical weathering, feldspar and mica (muscovite and biotite) are altered to clay through several stages, with each stage corresponding to a different clay mineral:
  • Feldspar→kaolinite→gibbsite;
  • Muscovite→illite→montmorillonite→kaolinite→gibbsite;
  • Biotite→chlorite→vermiculite→montmorillonite→beidellite→kaolinite→gibbsite.
Halloysite is in the kaolin group, and normally coexists with kaolinite in modern soils and sediments. The higher the intensity of weathering, the higher the content of clay minerals, such as those of the kaolin group (and possibly gibbsite). In NL granite weathering profile, halloysie is in common and play an important role in the carrier of Ree3+ [32,69]. But in the most of LC granite weathering profile, there is kaolinite only [28,29], which could be the reason why the concentration of Ree3+ in NL area are higher than LC area.
Weathering cycles are key to the secondary mineralization of Ree3+ in the weathering profile, with re-enrichment and re-fractionation and with Ree3+ being re-migrated and re-accumulated. As soil pH changes from acidic to alkalescent with increasing depth in the weathering profile, the Ree3+ concentration increases with the increasing adsorption capacity of clays. Previous studies have shown that a pH range of 5.4–6.8 is optimum for the accumulation of Ree3+ [32,70,71]. The HREEs of higher atomic mass are more soluble than LREEs in water, and accumulate at higher pH [32,70,71], with the depth of HREE enrichment, thus, being greater than that of LREE enrichment.

6. Conclusions

(1) REE minerals, including allanite, fluorapatite, and monazite, and HREE minerals such as xenotime, thorite, allanite(–Y), fluorite(–Y), and REE fluorcarbonate, make the greatest contribution to the REE content of the LC granite.The QN and MH granites are host rocks for Ree deposits with zircon U–Pb ages of ca. 217 Ma and 232 Ma, respectively, with these being the earliest times of REE mineral formation.
(2) The host rocks of the Ree deposits are strongly peraluminous with S-type granite affinities, suggesting they originated from partly melted crustal basement. Sr–Nd–Pb isotopic systematics and geochemical signatures of the LC granites indicate that they were derived from partial melting of the upper crust. Paleo-Tethyan continent–continent collision occurred during the early Indosinian, followed by post-collisional extension. Middle Indosinian magmatism was generated in a post-collisional tectonic setting related to early–middle Indosinian slab break-off.
(3) REE minerals such as allanite(–Y), fluorapatite, fluorite(–Y), and REE fluorcarbonate dissolved in the weathering crust are the main sources of Ree deposits. Dissolution of LREE and HREE minerals lead to LREE and HREE enrichment, respectively. Secondary minerals, such as kaolin-group minerals and illite (from altered feldspars and micas), are carriers of Ree3+, and its enrichment is influenced by the intensity of weathering; the stronger the weathering, the more REE minerals are dissolved in the weathering profile. Weathering cycles are key to the secondary mineralization of Ree3+, and stable geological conditions over a narrow altitudinal range promote retention of Ree3+ in the weathering profile.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/2075-163X/10/12/1116/s1. Analysis method [72,73,74,75,76,77].

Author Contributions

Writing—original draft preparation, L.L.; writing—review and editing, Y.L. and H.L.; methodology, Z.Z.; investigation, C.W.; resources, C.W. and X.X.; funding acquisition, Y.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The study was funded by the Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences Grant No. XDA20070304; China Geological Survey projects DD20160346, DD20160056, DD20190397, DD20190060, DD20190629, and DD20190173; the National Science Fund for Excellent Young Scholars (41922014); the National Natural Science Foundation of China Grant No. 41772044; and Fundamental Research Funds for the Institute of Geology, Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences (J2004).

Acknowledgments

We thank Yang Yue-qing, Wang Rui-jiang, Wang Denghong, Qin Jinghua, and other geologists for their help during the field investigations and sample analysis.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Chakhmouradian, A.R.; Wall, F. Rare Earth Elements: Minerals, Mines, Magnets (and More). Elements 2012, 8, 333–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Faris, N.; Ram, R.; Tardio, J.; Bhargava, S.; McMaster, S.A.; Pownceby, M.I. Application of ferrous pyrometallurgy to the beneficiation of rare earth bearing iron ores—A review. Miner. Eng. 2017, 110, 20–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Faris, N.; Ram, R.; Tardio, J.; Bhargava, S.; Pownceby, M.I. Characterisation of a ferruginous rare earth bearing lateritic ore and implications for rare earth mineral processing. Miner. Eng. 2019, 134, 23–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Soltani, F.; Abdollahy, M.; Petersen, J.; Ram, R.; Becker, M.; Koleini, S.J.; Moradkhani, D. Leaching and recovery of phosphate and rare earth elements from an iron-rich fluorapatite concentrate: Part I: Direct baking of the concentrate. Hydrometallurgy 2018, 177, 66–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Soltani, F.; Abdollahy, M.; Petersen, J.; Ram, R.; Koleini, S.J.; Moradkhani, D. Leaching and recovery of phosphate and rare earth elements from an iron-rich fluorapatite concentrate: Part II: Selective leaching of calcium and phosphate and acid baking of the residue. Hydrometallurgy 2019, 184, 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Kanazawa, Y.; Kamitani, M. Rare earth minerals and resources in the world. J. Alloy. Compd. 2006, 37, 1339–1343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Yang, Y.Q.; Hu, C.S.; Luo, Z.M. Geological characteristic of mineralization of rare earth deposit of the ion–absorption type and their prospecting direction. Bull. Chin. Acad. Geol. Sci. 1981, 2, 102–118. [Google Scholar]
  8. Sanematsu, K.; Murakami, H.; Watanabe, Y.; Duangsurigna, S.; Siphandone, V. Enrichment of rare earth elements (REE) in granitic rocks and their weathered crusts in central and southern Laos. Bull. Geol. Surv. Jpn. 2009, 60, 527–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Sanematsu, K.; Kon, Y.; Imai, A.; Watanabe, K.; Watanabe, Y. Geochemical and mineralogical characteristics of ion-adsorption type REE mineralization in Phuket, Thailand. Miner. Depos. 2013, 48, 437–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yuan, Z.X.; He, H.H.; Liu, L.J.; Wang, D.H.; Zhao, Z. Rare Metal and Rare Earth Deposit Abroad; Beijing Science Press: Beijing, China, 2016; pp. 1–110. [Google Scholar]
  11. Padrones, J.T.; Imai, A.; Takahashi, R. Geochemical Behavior of Rare Earth Elements in Weathered Granitic Rocks in Northern Palawan, Philippines. Resour. Geol. 2017, 67, 231–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Ram, R.; Becker, M.; Brugger, J.; Etschmann, B.; Burcher-Jones, C.; Howard, D.; Kooyman, P.J.; Petersen, J. Characterisation of a rare earth element- and zirconium-bearing ion-adsorption clay deposit in Madagascar. Chem. Geol. 2019, 522, 93–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Wang, D.H.; Wang, R.J.; Li, J.K.; Zhao, Z.; Yu, Y.; Dai, J.J.; Chen, Z.H.; Li, D.X.; Qu, W.J.; Deng, M.C.; et al. The progress in the strategic research and survey of rare earth, rare metal and rare–scattered elements mineral resources. Geol. China 2013, 40, 361–370. [Google Scholar]
  14. Wang, D.H.; Zhao, Z.; Yu, Y.; Zhao, T.; Li, J.K.; Dai, J.J.; Liu, X.X. Progress, problems and research orientation of ion–adsorpotion type rare earth resources. Rock Miner. Anal. 2013, 32, 796–802. [Google Scholar]
  15. Wang, F.; Liu, F.L.; Liu, P.H.; Shi, J.R.; Cai, J. Petrogenesis of Lincang granites in the south of Lancangjiang area: Constrain from geochemistry and zircon U–Pb geochronology. Acta Petrol. Sinica 2014, 30, 3034–3050. [Google Scholar]
  16. Wang, D.H.; Zhao, Z.; Yu, Y.; Wang, C.H.; Dai, J.J.; Sun, Y.; Zhao, T.; Li, J.K.; Huang, F.; Chen, Z.Y.; et al. A Review of the Achievements in the Survey and Study of Ion-absorption Type REE Deposits in China. Acta Geosci. Sinica 2017, 38, 317–325. [Google Scholar]
  17. Zhao, Z.; Wang, D.H.; Chen, Z.Y.; Guo, N.X.; Liu, X.X.; He, H.H. Metallogenic specialization of rare earth mineralized igneous rocks in the Eastern Nanling Region. Geotecton. Metallog. 2014, 38, 255–263. [Google Scholar]
  18. Zhao, Z.; Wang, D.H.; Liu, X.X.; Zhang, Q.W.; Yao, M.; Gu, W.N. Geochemical features of rare earth elements in different weathering stage of the Guangxi Huashan granite and its influence factors. Chin. Rare Earth 2015, 3, 14–20. [Google Scholar]
  19. Zhao, Z.; Wang, D.H.; Chen, Z.H.; Chen, Z.Y. Progress of research on metallogenic regularity of ion-adsorption type REE deposit in the Nanling Range. Acta Geol. Sinica 2017, 91, 2814–2827. [Google Scholar]
  20. Liu, Y.; Chakhmouradian, A.R.; Hou, Z.; Song, W.; Kynický, J. Development of REE mineralization in the giant Maoniuping deposit (Sichuan, China): Insights from mineralogy, fluid inclusions, and trace-element geochemistry. Miner. Depos. 2018, 54, 701–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Liu, Y.; Hou, Z. A synthesis of mineralization styles with an integrated genetic model of carbonatite-syenite-hosted REE deposits in the Cenozoic Mianning-Dechang REE metallogenic belt, the eastern Tibetan Plateau, southwestern China. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2017, 137, 35–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Liu, Y.; Chen, Z.Y.; Yang, Z.S.; Sun, X.; Zhu, Z.M.; Zhang, Q.C. Mineralogical and geochemical studies of brecciated ores in the Dalucao REE deposit, Sichuan Province, southwestern China. Ore Geol. Rev. 2015, 70, 613–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Liu, Y.; Zhu, Z.; Chen, C.; Zhang, S.; Sun, X.; Yang, Z.; Liang, W. Geochemical and mineralogical characteristics of weathered ore in the Dalucao REE deposit, Mianning—Dechang REE Belt, western Sichuan Province, southwestern China. Ore Geol. Rev. 2015, 71, 437–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Wu, C.Y.; Huang, D.H.; Bai, G.; Ding, X.S. Differentiation of rare earth elements and origin of granitic rocks,Nanling Mountain area. Acta Petrol. Mineral. 1990, 9, 106–116. [Google Scholar]
  25. Wu, C.Y.; Bai, G.; Huang, D.H.; Zhu, Z.S. Characteristics and significance of HREE-rich granitoids of the Nanling mountain area. Bull. Chin. Acad. Geol. Sci. 1992, 25, 43–58. [Google Scholar]
  26. Wu, C.Y.; Huang, D.H.; Guo, Z.X. REE geochemistry in the weathering process of granites in Longnan County, Jiangxi Province. Acta Geol. Sinica 1992, 63, 349–362. [Google Scholar]
  27. Bao, Z.; Zhao, Z. Geochemistry of mineralization with exchangeable REY in the weathering crusts of granitic rocks in South China. Ore Geol. Rev. 2008, 33, 519–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Lu, L.; Wang, D.H.; Wang, C.H.; Zhao, Z.; Feng, W.J.; Xu, X.C.; Yu, F. Mineralization regularity of ion–adsorption type REE deposits on Lincang granite in Yunnan Province. Acta Geol. 2019, 96, 1466–1478. [Google Scholar]
  29. Lu, L.; Wang, D.H.; Wang, C.H.; Zhao, Z.; Feng, W.J.; Xu, X.C.; Chen, C.; Zhong, H.R. The metallogenic regularity of ion-adsorption type REE deposit in Yunnan Province. Acta Geol. 2020, 94, 179–191. [Google Scholar]
  30. Migdisov, A.; Williams-Jones, A.; Brugger, J.; Caporuscio, F. Hydrothermal transport, deposition, and fractionation of the REE: Experimental data and thermodynamic calculations. Chem. Geol. 2016, 439, 13–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Yusoff, Z.M.; Ngwenya, B.T.; Parsons, I. Mobility and fractionation of REEs during deep weathering of geochemically contrasting granites in a tropical setting, Malaysia. Chem. Geol. 2013, 349, 71–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Yang, M.; Liang, X.; Ma, L.; Huang, J.; He, H.; Zhu, J. Adsorption of REEs on kaolinite and halloysite: A link to the REE distribution on clays in the weathering crust of granite. Chem. Geol. 2019, 525, 210–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. YNBGMR (Yunnan Bureau Geological Mineral Resource). Regional Geology of Guizhou Province; Geology Publish House: Beijing, China, 1990; pp. 1–729. [Google Scholar]
  34. Zhang, Y.F. An approach to the characeristics of the Indo–China movement in western Yunnan area. Yunnan Geol. 1985, 1, 59–68. [Google Scholar]
  35. Heppe, K.; Helmcke, D.; Wemmer, K. The Lancang River zone of southwestern Yunnan, China: A questionable location for the active continental margin of Paleo-Tethys. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2007, 30, 706–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Liu, H.; Wang, Y.; Fan, W.; Zi, J.; Cai, Y.; Yang, G. Petrogenesis and tectonic implications of Late-Triassic high ɛ Nd(t)-ɛ Hf(t) granites in the Ailaoshan tectonic zone (SW China). Sci. China Earth Sci. 2014, 57, 2181–2194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Turner, S.; Foden, J.; Morrison, R. Derivation of some A-type magmas by fractionation of basaltic magma: An example from the Padthaway Ridge, South Australia. Lithos 1992, 28, 151–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Peccerillo, A.; Taylor, S.R. Geochemistry of eocene calc-alkaline volcanic rocks from the Kastamonu area, Northern Turkey. Contrib. Miner. Pet. 1976, 58, 63–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Kemp, A.; Hawkesworth, C. Granitic Perspectives on the Generation and Secular Evolution of the Continental Crust. Treatise Geochem. 2003, 3, 349–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Peng, T.P.; Wang, Y.J.; Fan, W.M.; Liu, D.Y.; Shi, Y.R.; Miao, L.C. SHRIMP zircon U–Pb geochronology of early Mesozoic felsic igneous rocks from the southern Lancangjiang and its tectonic implications. Sci. China Ser. D Earth Sci. 2006, 49, 1032–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Peng, T.; Wilde, S.A.; Wang, Y.; Fan, W.; Peng, B. Mid-Triassic felsic igneous rocks from the southern Lancangjiang Zone, SW China: Petrogenesis and implications for the evolution of Paleo-Tethys. Lithos 2013, 15–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Jian, P.; Liu, D.; Kröner, A.; Zhang, Q.; Wang, Y.; Sun, X.; Zhang, W. Devonian to Permian plate tectonic cycle of the Paleo-Tethys Orogen in southwest China (I): Geochemistry of ophiolites, arc/back-arc assemblages and within-plate igneous rocks. Lithos 2009, 113, 748–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Jian, P.; Liu, D.; Kröner, A.; Zhang, Q.; Wang, Y.; Sun, X.; Zhang, W. Devonian to Permian plate tectonic cycle of the Paleo-Tethys Orogen in southwest China (II): Insights from zircon ages of ophiolites, arc/back-arc assemblages and within-plate igneous rocks and generation of the Emeishan CFB province. Lithos 2009, 113, 767–784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Kong, H.L. Genchemistty, Geochronology and Petrogenisis of Lincang Granites in Southern Lancangjiang Zone of Sanjiang Area. Master’s Thesis, China University of Geosciences, Beijing, China, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  45. Kong, H.L.; Dong, G.C.; Mo, X.X.; Zhao, Z.D.; Zhu, D.C.; Wang, S.; Li, R.; Wang, Q.L. Petrogenesis of Lincang granites in Sanjiang area of western Yunnan Province: Constraints from geochemistry, zircon U-Pb geochronology and Hf isotope. Acta Petrol. Sinica 2012, 28, 1438–1452. [Google Scholar]
  46. Whalen, J.B.; Currie, K.L.; Chappell, B.W. A-type granites: Geochemical characteristics, discrimination and petrogenesis. Contrib. Miner. Pet. 1987, 95, 407–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Sun, S.-S.; McDonough, W.F. Chemical and Isotopic Systematics of Oceanic Basalts: Implications for Mantle Composition and Processes. In Magmatism in the Ocean Basins; Geological Society: London, UK, 1989; Volume 42, pp. 313–345. [Google Scholar]
  48. Cong, B.L.; Wu, G.Y.; Zhang, Q. Petrotectonic evolution of the Tethys zone in western Yunnan, China. Chin. Sci. Bull. 1993, 23, 1201–1207. [Google Scholar]
  49. Qiu, Y.M.; Gao, S.; McNaughton, N.J.; Groves, D.I.; Ling, W.L. First evidence of >3.2 Ga continental crust in the Yangtze craton of south China and its implications for Archean crustal evolution and Phanerozoic tectonics. Geology 2000, 33, 309–314. [Google Scholar]
  50. Shi, X.B.; Qiu, X.L.; Liu, H.L.; Chu, Z.Y.; Xia, B. Thermochronological analyses on the cooling history of the Lincang granitoid batholith, Western Yunnan. Acta Petrol. Sinica 2006, 22, 465–479. [Google Scholar]
  51. Li, X.L. Basic characteristic and formation structural environment of Lincang composite granite batholith. Yunnan Geol. 1996, 1, 1–18. [Google Scholar]
  52. Pupin, J.P. Zircon and granite petrology. Contrib. Miner. Pet. 1980, 73, 207–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Zapata, A.; Botelho, N.F. Mineralogical and geochemical characterization of rare-earth occurrences in the Serra do Mendes massif, Goiás, Brazil. J. Geochem. Explor. 2018, 188, 398–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Sylvester, P.J. Post-collisional strongly peraluminous granites. Lithos 1998, 45, 29–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Altherr, R.; Holl, A.; Hegner, E.; Langer, C.; Kreuzer, H. High-potassium, calc-alkaline I-type plutonism in the European Variscides: Northern Vosges (France) and northern Schwarzwald (Germany). Lithos 2000, 50, 51–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Chappell, B.W.; White, A.J.R. I- and S-type granites in the Lachlan Fold Belt. Earth Environ. Sci. Trans. R. Soc. Edinb. 1992, 83, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Chappell, B.W.; White, A.J.R. Two contrasting granite types: 25 years later. Aust. J. Earth Sci. 2001, 48, 488–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Chappell, B.W.; White, A.J.R. Two contrasting granite types. Pacific Geol. 1974, 8, 173–174. [Google Scholar]
  59. Harris, N.B.W.; Pearce, J.A.; Tindle, A.G. Geochemical Characteristics of Collision-Zone Magmatism. In Collision Tectonics; Geological Society: London, UK, 1986; pp. 67–81. [Google Scholar]
  60. Brown, M. Granite: From genesis to emplacement. Bull. Geol. Soc. Am. 2013, 125, 1079–1113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Harris, N.B.W.; Inger, S. Trace element modelling of pelite-derived granites. Contrib. Miner. Pet. 1992, 110, 46–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Zindler, A.; Hart, S. Chemical geodynamics. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 1986, 14, 493–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Mo, X.X.; Shen, S.Y.; Zhu, Q.W. Volcanics-Ophiolite and Mineralization of Middle and Southern Part. In Sanjiang, Southern China; Geological Publishing House: Beijing, China, 1998; pp. 1–128. [Google Scholar]
  64. Sone, M.; Metcalfe, I. Parallel Tethyan sutures in mainland Southeast Asia: New insights for Palaeo-Tethys closure and implications for the Indosinian orogeny. Comptes Rendus Geosci. 2008, 340, 166–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Fan, W.M.; Wang, Y.J.; Zhang, A.M.; Zhang, F.F.; Zhang, Y.Z. Permian arc-backarc basin development along the Ailaoshan tectonic zone: Geochemical, isotopic and geochronological evidence from the Mojiang volcanic rocks, Southwest China. Lithos 2010, 119, 553–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Bonin, B. A-type granites and related rocks: Evolution of a concept, problems and prospects. Lithos 2007, 97, 1–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Pearce, J.A.; Harris, N.B.W.; Tindle, A.G. Trace Element Discrimination Diagrams for the Tectonic Interpretation of Granitic Rocks. J. Petrol. 1984, 25, 956–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Pearce, J.A. Sources and settings of granitic rocks. Episodes 1996, 19, 120–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Li, M.Y.H.; Zhou, M.-F.; Williams-Jones, A.E. The Genesis of Regolith-Hosted Heavy Rare Earth Element Deposits: Insights from the World-Class Zudong Deposit in Jiangxi Province, South China. Econ. Geol. 2019, 114, 541–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Henderson, P. Rare Earth Element Geochemistry; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1984; pp. 180–213. [Google Scholar]
  71. Chen, D.Q.; Wu, J.S. The mineralization mechanism of ion-adsorbed REE deposit. J. Chin. Rare Earth Soc. 1990, 8, 175–179. [Google Scholar]
  72. Qi, L.; Hu, J.; Gregoire, D.C. Determination of trace elements in granites by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Talanta 2000, 51, 507–513. [Google Scholar]
  73. Liu, Y.S.; Gao, S.; Hu, Z.C.; Gao, C.G.; Zong, K.Q.; Wang, D.B. Continental and oceanic crust recycling-induced melt-peridotite interactions in the Trans-North China Orogen: U-Pb dating, Hf isotopes and trace elements in zircons from mantle xenoliths. J. Petrol. 2010, 51, 537–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Li, X.H.; Liu, Y.; Li, Q.L.; Guo, C.H.; Chamberlain, K.R. Precise determination of Phanerozoic zircon Pb/Pb age by multi-collector SIMS without external standardi- zation. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 2009, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Sláma, J.; Košler, J.; Condon, D.J. Plešovice zircon—A new natural reference material for U-Pb and Hf isotopic microanalysis. Chem. Geol. 2008, 249, 1–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Wiedenbeck, M.; Alle, P.; Corfu, F.; Griffin, W.L.; Meier, M.; Oberli, F.; Vonquadt, A.; Roddick, J.C.; Speigel, W. Three natural zircon standards for U-Th–Pb, Lu–Hf, trace–element and REE analyses. Geostandard Newslett. 1995, 19, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Ludwig, K.R. Users Manual for Isoplot/Ex rev. 2.49. Berkeley Geochronology Centre Special Publication. 2001. Available online: http://www.geo.cornell.edu/geology/classes/Geo656/Isoplot%20Manual.pdf (accessed on 21 February 2020).
Minerals 10 01116 g001 550
Figure 1. The distribution of LC batholith in China (a) and Southeast Asia (b), and regional geology of QN, SY, MW and MH iRee deposits showing the location of the samples (c) (modified from references [33,36]). 1—granite; 2—porphyritic biotite granite; 3—granodiorite; 4—metamorphic rock; 5—fault; 6—national boundaries; 7—river; 8—iRee deposit; 9—Sampled location.
Figure 1. The distribution of LC batholith in China (a) and Southeast Asia (b), and regional geology of QN, SY, MW and MH iRee deposits showing the location of the samples (c) (modified from references [33,36]). 1—granite; 2—porphyritic biotite granite; 3—granodiorite; 4—metamorphic rock; 5—fault; 6—national boundaries; 7—river; 8—iRee deposit; 9—Sampled location.
Minerals 10 01116 g001
Minerals 10 01116 g002 550
Figure 2. Petrological diagram of QN and MH granites: (A) granodiorite was intruded by medium–fine-grained biotite granite; (B) medium–coarse-grained biotite granite; (C,D) granodioritc xenoliths are observed in the monzonitic granites; (a) crosshatch twins of microline; (b) carlsbad twin of plagioclase; (c,g) quartz occurs as anhedron fill into the interspace of plagioclase; (d,g) plagioclase altered to serisite and (d) biotite altered to chlorite; (e) albite occurs as anhedron; (f) biotite was replaced and altered to muscovite; (h) muscovite occurs as sheet structure; Qtz—Quartz; Pl—Plagioclase; Ab—Albite; Bt—Biotite; Ms—Muscovite; Chl—Chlorite; Ep—Epidote; Ilm—Ilmenite; Aln—Allanite; Ap—Apatite; Mnz—monazite; Py—Pyrite; Zrn—Zircon.
Figure 2. Petrological diagram of QN and MH granites: (A) granodiorite was intruded by medium–fine-grained biotite granite; (B) medium–coarse-grained biotite granite; (C,D) granodioritc xenoliths are observed in the monzonitic granites; (a) crosshatch twins of microline; (b) carlsbad twin of plagioclase; (c,g) quartz occurs as anhedron fill into the interspace of plagioclase; (d,g) plagioclase altered to serisite and (d) biotite altered to chlorite; (e) albite occurs as anhedron; (f) biotite was replaced and altered to muscovite; (h) muscovite occurs as sheet structure; Qtz—Quartz; Pl—Plagioclase; Ab—Albite; Bt—Biotite; Ms—Muscovite; Chl—Chlorite; Ep—Epidote; Ilm—Ilmenite; Aln—Allanite; Ap—Apatite; Mnz—monazite; Py—Pyrite; Zrn—Zircon.
Minerals 10 01116 g002
Minerals 10 01116 g003 550
Figure 3. Optical (d,e) and back scattered electron (BSE, a–c and f–i) images of REE minerals in the host rock of QN and MH iRee deposit: (a,c) monazite and zircon occur as anhedron associated with apatite; (b) monazite and thorite occur as anhedron associated with fluorapatite; (d,g) monazite and allanite zircon occur as subhedral—anhedral associated with biotite, which altered to chlorite; (e,h) apatite and zircon occur as euhedron associated with biotie, which altered to chlorite; (f,i) Y-fluorapatite occurs as anhedron filled into the interspace of feldspar; Mnz—Monazite; Xtm—Xenotime; Aln—Allanite; Ap—Apatite; Fl-Ap—Fluorapatite; Trt—Thorite; Zrn—Zircon; Fl—Fluorite.
Figure 3. Optical (d,e) and back scattered electron (BSE, a–c and f–i) images of REE minerals in the host rock of QN and MH iRee deposit: (a,c) monazite and zircon occur as anhedron associated with apatite; (b) monazite and thorite occur as anhedron associated with fluorapatite; (d,g) monazite and allanite zircon occur as subhedral—anhedral associated with biotite, which altered to chlorite; (e,h) apatite and zircon occur as euhedron associated with biotie, which altered to chlorite; (f,i) Y-fluorapatite occurs as anhedron filled into the interspace of feldspar; Mnz—Monazite; Xtm—Xenotime; Aln—Allanite; Ap—Apatite; Fl-Ap—Fluorapatite; Trt—Thorite; Zrn—Zircon; Fl—Fluorite.
Minerals 10 01116 g003
Minerals 10 01116 g004 550
Figure 4. Plots of SiO2 versus K2O (a), Na2O versus K2O (b) and A/CNK versus A/NK (c) for the LC granite (modified from references [37,38,39]; the LC batholith data after e.g., [40,41,42,43,44,45]).
Figure 4. Plots of SiO2 versus K2O (a), Na2O versus K2O (b) and A/CNK versus A/NK (c) for the LC granite (modified from references [37,38,39]; the LC batholith data after e.g., [40,41,42,43,44,45]).
Minerals 10 01116 g004
Minerals 10 01116 g005 550
Figure 5. Plots of Zr+Nb+Ce+Y versus (Na2O+K2O)/CaO (a), 1000×Ga/Al versus (Na2O+K2O)/CaO (b) and A(Al—Na—K)-C(Ca)-F(Fe3++Mg) (c) for the LC granite (modified from reference [46]).
Figure 5. Plots of Zr+Nb+Ce+Y versus (Na2O+K2O)/CaO (a), 1000×Ga/Al versus (Na2O+K2O)/CaO (b) and A(Al—Na—K)-C(Ca)-F(Fe3++Mg) (c) for the LC granite (modified from reference [46]).
Minerals 10 01116 g005
Minerals 10 01116 g006 550
Figure 6. Harker diagrams (SiO2 versus FeO (a), MgO (b), TiO2(c), CaO (d), MnO (e), P2O5 (f)) for the major elements in the LC granite.
Figure 6. Harker diagrams (SiO2 versus FeO (a), MgO (b), TiO2(c), CaO (d), MnO (e), P2O5 (f)) for the major elements in the LC granite.
Minerals 10 01116 g006
Minerals 10 01116 g007 550
Figure 7. Chondrite-normalized REE patterns (a), primitive mantle-normalized elements diagrams (b) of the LC granite (normalization values after [47]; the LC batholith data after, e.g., [40,41,42,43,44,45]).
Figure 7. Chondrite-normalized REE patterns (a), primitive mantle-normalized elements diagrams (b) of the LC granite (normalization values after [47]; the LC batholith data after, e.g., [40,41,42,43,44,45]).
Minerals 10 01116 g007
Minerals 10 01116 g008 550
Figure 8. Cathodoluminescence (CL) images of representative zircon grains (a,c,e) and LA-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb weighted age diagram for the QN and MH granites (b,d,f).
Figure 8. Cathodoluminescence (CL) images of representative zircon grains (a,c,e) and LA-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb weighted age diagram for the QN and MH granites (b,d,f).
Minerals 10 01116 g008
Minerals 10 01116 g009 550
Figure 9. Diagrams of (87Sr/86Sr)i-εNd(t) (a) and Pb-isotopic composition (b) of biotite granite obtained from the LC granite (the LC batholith data after e.g., [41,50]).
Figure 9. Diagrams of (87Sr/86Sr)i-εNd(t) (a) and Pb-isotopic composition (b) of biotite granite obtained from the LC granite (the LC batholith data after e.g., [41,50]).
Minerals 10 01116 g009
Minerals 10 01116 g010 550
Figure 10. Plots of Al2O3/TiO2 versus CaO/Na2O (a), Rb/Sr versus Rb/Ba (b), Ca/(MgO+FeOT) versus Al2O3/(MgO+FeOT) (c), Ba versus Rb/Sr (d) for the potential magma source of the LC granite (modified from references [54,55]).
Figure 10. Plots of Al2O3/TiO2 versus CaO/Na2O (a), Rb/Sr versus Rb/Ba (b), Ca/(MgO+FeOT) versus Al2O3/(MgO+FeOT) (c), Ba versus Rb/Sr (d) for the potential magma source of the LC granite (modified from references [54,55]).
Minerals 10 01116 g010
Minerals 10 01116 g011 550
Figure 11. Plots of Y versus Nb (a), Y+Ta versus Rb (b) and Y+Nb versus Rb (a) for the LC granite (modified from references [67,68]).
Figure 11. Plots of Y versus Nb (a), Y+Ta versus Rb (b) and Y+Nb versus Rb (a) for the LC granite (modified from references [67,68]).
Minerals 10 01116 g011
Minerals 10 01116 g012 550
Figure 12. Diagrams of LREE versus HREE (a) and CIA versus REE (b) of the LC granite and weathering profile.
Figure 12. Diagrams of LREE versus HREE (a) and CIA versus REE (b) of the LC granite and weathering profile.
Minerals 10 01116 g012
Table
Table 1. REE geochemical characteristics in REE minerals from the QN and MH granites (%).
Table 1. REE geochemical characteristics in REE minerals from the QN and MH granites (%).
MineralFormulaREOLREOHREOLREO/HREONd2O3/REOCe2O3/REOEu2O3/REODy2O3/REOY2O3/REO
Sphene (n = 2)CaTi[SiO4]O0.370.210.390.780.120.250.000.130.19
apatite (n = 3)Ca5(PO4)3F8.467.591.566.490.210.500.000.090.41
allanite (n = 17)(Ce,Ca)2(Al,Fe3+)3(SiO4)3(OH)16.9214.535.788.250.223.420.010.030.25
Monazite (n = 21)(Ce,La,Nd,Th)PO461.0357.5517.0116.800.2212.890.000.001.03
xenotime (n = 5)YPO453.050.7752.280.010.010.000.000.070.74
thorite (n = 2)(Y,Th,Ca,U)(Ti,Fe3+)3(O,OH)417.6116.551.0710.670.390.310.000.000.00
zircon (n = 2)(Zr,Y)(Si,P)O40.670.110.560.260.000.150.000.180.11
allanite-Y (n = 7)(Ce,Ca,Y)2(Al,Fe3+)3(SiO4)3(OH)31.8320.8910.951.800.340.020.000.090.16
flourite-Y (n = 1)(Ca,Y)F215.569.386.181.520.300.030.000.060.21
REE-flourcarbonate (n = 1) 59.2031.9427.261.170.270.060.000.080.28
Table
Table 2. Major (wt.%), trace elements (×10−6), and rare earth elements (×10−6) of QN and MH granites.
Table 2. Major (wt.%), trace elements (×10−6), and rare earth elements (×10−6) of QN and MH granites.
Samplelc2-j2lc2-j3lc3-j1lc4-j1mh1-j1
(wt.%)
SiO262.775.472.774.767.7
Al2O315.912.113.712.90.53
CaO2.371.441.461.5914.7
Fe2O36.442.770.120.094.29
FeO5.282.142.181.623.53
K2O2.270.870.680.390.09
MgO0.080.050.070.051.94
MnO2.121.882.662.351.76
Na2O5.404.454.524.852.42
P2O50.850.320.270.204.61
TiO20.250.050.070.050.19
CO20.360.200.230.200.48
H2O+0.870.650.700.440.92
LOI0.830.500.630.490.90
(×10−6)
Li37.814.836.016.239.1
Be2.271.465.001.406.03
Cr41.441.419.117.664.6
Co15.45.684.093.0010.2
Ni16.010.86.712.6121.9
Cu17.211.110.24.2513.2
Zn93.438.436.023.063.4
Ga26.115.916.613.319.0
Rb277163257159268
Sr18113685.5119126
Mo1.060.840.390.680.82
Cd0.07<0.050.070.030.10
In0.13<0.050.050.020.07
Cs8.663.779.514.4716.4
Ba19721322638792754
Tl1.470.821.380.901.50
Pb43.355.241.137.642.4
Bi0.190.171.130.111.10
Th25.222.928.640.524.2
U3.453.536.033.537.90
Nb19.78.6610.93.9613.6
Ta1.700.911.470.481.54
Zr33915396.192.9172
Hf9.214.743.713.275.21
Sn5.062.7310.53.8910.9
Sb0.160.090.090.070.07
W2.820.682.480.952.44
As2.511.031.011.0911.5
V11636.120.816.473.5
Sc16.16.605.423.6810.8
La56.541.515459.541.5
Ce11583.881.111287.1
Pr12.49.3541.313.59.89
Nd45.634.116650.136.3
Sm9.656.5241.77.937.52
Eu1.451.276.181.031.14
Gd9.115.1738.96.286.11
Tb1.790.806.380.780.95
Dy10.54.2433.53.685.07
Ho1.920.705.780.700.83
Er5.291.8714.21.892.28
Tm0.640.261.870.230.31
Yb3.531.6513.61.712.02
Lu0.510.251.470.200.29
Y54.321.114316.024.0
ΣREE328212749275225
LREE240176490244183
HREE87.636.025831.541.8
LREE/HREE2.754.901.897.744.38
δEu0.150.220.150.150.17
Table
Table 3. LA-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb analytical data of the QN and MH granites.
Table 3. LA-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb analytical data of the QN and MH granites.
Sample/No.UThPb(t)Th/U207Pb/235U206Pb/238U207Pb/235U208Pb/232Th
(×10−6) Ratio1σRatio1σMa1σMa1σ
lc4-j1, N = 25
1211532887317031.360.24960.00810.03650.0012226.26.60230.97.30
2134146744.20.350.25160.00820.03640.0012227.96.70230.57.30
328512510.80.440.25990.00930.03660.0012234.67.50231.47.40
432618213.80.560.25520.00880.03610.0012230.87.20228.67.30
528516311.90.570.23620.00830.03420.0011215.36.80216.66.90
696744335.40.460.23670.00780.03420.0011215.76.40216.96.90
747529521.90.620.23610.00790.03440.0011215.26.50217.86.90
8107666048.50.610.23660.00780.03430.0011215.66.40217.26.90
924213210.00.540.23760.00840.03430.0011216.46.90217.66.90
1035818914.40.530.23370.01180.03410.0012213.39.70216.17.30
1133434221.51.020.25190.00850.03610.0012228.16.90228.37.20
12124823230.20.190.25060.00820.03650.0012227.16.70230.97.30
1311772.05.10.620.25630.01540.03610.0013231.712.50228.98.10
1439525118.40.640.25450.00860.03620.0012230.26.90229.17.20
1578449436.20.630.23750.00810.03440.0011216.46.70218.26.90
1652027820.70.530.23560.00790.03410.0011214.86.50216.36.80
1727613910.60.500.23480.00870.03440.0011214.27.20218.07.00
1813769.45.30.510.23820.01060.03430.0011217.08.70217.67.10
1916592.67.20.560.24020.01070.0340.0011218.68.80215.27.10
201961169.20.600.24030.01350.03440.0012218.711.00218.17.50
2169425421.90.370.23640.00780.03430.0011215.56.40217.56.90
2278533628.10.430.23410.00770.03440.0011213.56.30218.06.90
2318278.16.50.430.23990.01780.0340.0013218.314.60215.48.10
2413374.65.60.560.23640.00890.03430.0011215.57.30217.26.90
2557716716.60.290.23520.00820.03430.0011214.56.80217.26.90
lc2-j3, N = 25
1102730932.10.300.2170.00730.03210.00101996.10204.504.50
297433132.20.340.22370.00750.03220.00112056.20196.604.30
368925622.30.370.2390.00800.03480.00112186.50205.404.50
427113610.50.500.24070.00840.03480.00112196.80203.404.70
5115975.021.40.060.24710.00820.03490.00112246.70213.305.80
659748.211.10.080.24180.00810.03490.00112206.60226.106.20
744923.47.90.050.2470.00940.03490.00122247.70252.0013.9
8223711461040.510.23930.00780.03500.00112186.40212.004.40
917181.06.20.470.24960.00890.03500.00112267.30192.404.80
1042516113.60.380.24520.00830.03510.00112236.70194.604.40
1138316613.80.430.24440.00830.03510.00112226.80207.004.80
1243351110142.70.260.24430.00800.03510.00112226.50243.205.10
13193138191.50.200.4520.01470.06150.002037910.3368.507.70
14103652979.20.510.480.01570.06440.002139810.8402.808.40
15103894.151.00.090.67390.02230.07120.002352313.5588.2014.1
1618088131500.450.59830.01950.08220.002747612.4450.409.40
17115311582.80.100.96130.03190.10550.003468416.5784.8018.8
1858.080.016.51.371.03370.04910.11800.004172124.5692.6019.4
1951713658.60.261.33840.04380.14150.004686319.0745.6016.0
2046426384.90.571.45140.04750.14990.004891119.7817.1017.1
2162910968.20.171.450.04710.15040.004891019.5898.8018.9
229761691570.172.29810.07510.17330.0056121223.11240.8026.3
233562381180.672.22110.07310.19630.0064118823.01136.3023.5
2410717052.71.592.29980.07600.20390.0066121223.41004.4020.8
2537712297.80.323.72220.12050.27680.0089157625.91329.7027.1
mh1-j1, N = 25
128616313.80.570.26320.02430.03640.0015237.219.5230.59.6
228321515.40.760.26270.01580.03650.0013236.812.7231.28.1
340326723.10.660.25930.01010.03660.0012234.18.1231.67.4
413680.86.200.600.26060.01110.03660.0012235.19.0231.97.5
552027124.70.520.25930.01440.03660.0013234.111.6232.07.9
645929425.40.640.26110.01030.03670.0012235.58.3232.17.4
729719616.00.660.26380.01010.03670.0012237.78.1232.37.4
829515.95.400.050.26220.01350.03670.0013236.510.8232.37.8
914299.47.000.700.25680.01220.03670.0012232.09.8232.57.6
1029715912.70.530.26110.00940.03670.0012235.67.6232.57.3
1198.055.74.40.570.25770.01140.03670.0012232.89.2232.67.5
1251118019.60.350.25350.00900.03680.0012229.47.3232.97.3
1349721720.70.440.25330.01020.03680.0012229.38.2233.17.5
1423881.87.400.340.26270.01340.03690.0013236.810.8233.47.8
1510850.74.100.470.25790.01170.03690.0012233.09.5233.77.6
1617949.66.600.280.27050.02040.03690.0014243.116.3233.98.9
1744518418.60.410.26040.00970.0370.0012235.07.8234.17.4
1851025125.90.490.26180.01370.03710.0013236.111.0234.67.9
1918115410.50.850.25980.01220.03730.0013234.59.8235.87.7
2028452.58.800.180.29760.02440.04050.0016264.619.1256.210.0
2170912735.50.180.53020.02300.06580.0022432.015.2410.613.2
2233226579.70.801.44430.04850.15030.0048907.520.2902.426.8
235402531090.471.44120.04620.15070.0048906.219.2904.726.7
2416744.028.40.261.97060.06360.15090.00481105.521.8905.826.8
2513640.622.80.302.16450.07300.17060.00551169.723.41015.130.0
Table
Table 4. Sr-Nd isotope ratios of the QN and MH granites.
Table 4. Sr-Nd isotope ratios of the QN and MH granites.
Samplet
(Ma)		Rb
(ppm)		Sr
(ppm)		87Rb/
86Sr		87Sr/
86Sr		2σISrεSr (t)147Sm/
144Nd		143Nd/
144Nd		2σINdεNd (0)εNd (t)fSm/NdT2DM
YNlc3-j122025785.53.9190.7335140.0000070.72058232.20.093490.5119820.0000030.51184−12.8−9.75−0.521801
YNlc4-j12201591193.9050.7334590.0000080.72057232.10.092670.511990.0000070.511849−12.64−9.57−0.531787
YNmh-j12202461463.9180.7336160.0000060.72069233.80.093490.5119820.0000060.51184−12.8−9.75−0.521801
Table
Table 5. Pb isotope ratios of the QN and MH granites.
Table 5. Pb isotope ratios of the QN and MH granites.
Sample206Pb/204Pb2σ207Pb/204Pb2σ208Pb/204Pb2σ(206Pb/204Pb)i(207Pb/204Pb)i(208Pb/204Pb)i
YNlc3-j119.3460.000015.8230.0000139.6900.00118.99315.80539.145
YNlc4-j118.9880.000015.7990.0000139.8190.00118.76315.78838.979
YNmh-j119.3260.000015.8170.0000139.7130.00118.29315.76539.107
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lu, L.; Liu, Y.; Liu, H.; Zhao, Z.; Wang, C.; Xu, X. Geochemical and Geochronological Constraints on the Genesis of Ion-Adsorption-Type REE Mineralization in the Lincang Pluton, SW China. Minerals 2020, 10, 1116. https://doi.org/10.3390/min10121116

AMA Style

Lu L, Liu Y, Liu H, Zhao Z, Wang C, Xu X. Geochemical and Geochronological Constraints on the Genesis of Ion-Adsorption-Type REE Mineralization in the Lincang Pluton, SW China. Minerals. 2020; 10(12):1116. https://doi.org/10.3390/min10121116

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lu, Lei, Yan Liu, Huichuan Liu, Zhi Zhao, Chenghui Wang, and Xiaochun Xu. 2020. "Geochemical and Geochronological Constraints on the Genesis of Ion-Adsorption-Type REE Mineralization in the Lincang Pluton, SW China" Minerals 10, no. 12: 1116. https://doi.org/10.3390/min10121116

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop