Next Article in Journal
Physicochemical Properties of Fe-Bearing Phases from Commercial Colombian Coal Ash
Previous Article in Journal
Color Origin of Red Beds within the Danxia Basin, Southern China
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Minerals
Volume 13
Issue 8
10.3390/min13081053
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

Provenance, Sedimentary Environment, Tectonic Setting, and Uranium Mineralization Implications of the Yaojia Formation, SW Songliao Basin, NE China

by
Mengya Chen
,
Fengjun Nie
*,
Fei Xia
,
Zhaobin Yan
and
Dongguang Yang
School of Earth Sciences, East China University of Technology, Nanchang 330013, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Minerals 2023, 13(8), 1053; https://doi.org/10.3390/min13081053
Submission received: 17 May 2023 / Revised: 20 July 2023 / Accepted: 7 August 2023 / Published: 9 August 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Mineral Geochemistry and Geochronology)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The SW Songliao Basin is an extremely significant part of the giant sandstone uranium metallogenic belt in northern China. The Yaojia Formation is the most significant ore-bearing layer in the region. However, the poorly constrained sedimentology of the Yaojia Formation has substantially hindered the understanding of the basin and the exploration of uranium deposits within it. To determine the sedimentology, provenance, and tectonic setting of the Yaojia Formation in the study area, we conducted petrography, whole-rock geochemical analysis, and electron probe research. Based on the results of the study, it appears that the Yaojia Formation sandstone is predominantly composed of lithic sandstone and feldspar lithic sandstone. Uranium exists in two forms: as independent minerals and as adsorption uranium. Pitchblende is the most common independent uranium mineral, with small amounts of coffinite also occurring. The ratios of Sr/Ba, V/(V+Ni), V/Cr, Ni/Co, and (Cu+Mo)/Zn of the samples indicate that the Yaojia Formation was deposited in a sub- to oxygen-rich freshwater environment with a moderately stratified bottom water body and smooth circulation. The geochemical characteristics of the Yaojia Formation sandstones imply that they are primarily derived from felsic igneous rocks in the upper continental crust in active continental margin and continental island arc environments. According to geochemistry and previous detrital zircon U-Pb chronology studies, the Mesozoic and Late Paleozoic felsic igneous rocks of the southern Great Xing’an Mountains are the principal sources of the Yaojia Formation in the SW Songliao Basin. Besides providing sediments for the study area, the uranium-rich felsic igneous rocks in the source areas also represent a long-term, stable, and ideal source of uranium, suggesting substantial potential for uranium exploration in the study area.

1. Introduction

The provenance analysis is essential for determining the nature of the sedimentary basin [1,2,3,4,5]. The geochemical composition analysis of sediments is one of the most sensitive and effective tools for determining the provenance, weathering conditions, tectonic background, and sedimentary environment of the sediments of interest [6,7]. Elemental enrichment, storage, and sedimentary environments are distinct among strata with differing lithologies [8,9]. The homogeneous texture and high trace element concentration of sandstones and mudstones make them preferred for geochemical research on sedimentary rocks [10]. With the help of geochemistry analysis, many remarkable achievements have been made in recent years in identifying the provenance and sedimentary environment of sandstones, thus providing a new perspective for understanding the nature and evolution of basins and source areas [11,12,13].
The Songliao Basin is a significant part of the giant sandstone uranium metallogenic belt in northern China [14]. Several industrial-grade uranium deposits (such as the Dalin uranium deposit, the Baolongshan uranium deposit, and the Hailijin uranium deposit) have been discovered in the study area. The uranium deposits in the region are generally considered to be interstratified oxidized-zone sandstone-type deposits [15,16]. In the region, the Yaojia Formation is the most significant uranium-bearing rock series. The numerous studies that have been conducted on sedimentary facies, mineral paragenesis, tectonic setting, metallogenic mechanism, and metallogenic age have significantly increased the potential for uranium exploration in the research area [17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24]. Previous research has concluded that uranium deposits are the products of long-term weathering and erosion of uranium-rich source rocks in the provenance. The process has transported uranium from the source rocks to the sedimentary basin in oxygenated uranium-bearing fluids, which then precipitated into the ore-bearing layers [18,25,26,27,28,29]. Consequently, provenance plays a key role in the formation of sandstone-type uranium deposits, as it provides the necessary uranium-rich clastic materials and oxygenated uranium-bearing fluids. By elucidating sediment sources and sedimentary transport pathways, accurate predictions and evaluations can be made for the exploration of sandstone-type uranium deposits [27]. Despite numerous studies in this region, there has always been controversy regarding the provenance of the Yaojia Formation. Recently, scholars have generally believed that the Yaojia Formation sediments originated from felsic igneous rocks from the Yanshan orogenic belt in the south of the basin [18,27,29]. Alternatively, some scholars believe that the Great Xing’an Mountains in the west of the basin and the Zhangguangcai Mountains in the southeast contributed clastic materials to the Yaojia Formation [28,30,31]. There have been a few elementary investigations into the lithological properties of the Yaojia Formation sandstones [15,18,27,28,29]. However, there is still a need for refinement of information regarding the source of sediments, particularly in identifying the types of source rocks. Moreover, few studies have been conducted on the provenance of the Yaojia Formation from a geochemical perspective.
Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to identify the provenance, tectonic context, sedimentary environment, and uranium metallogenesis of the Yaojia Formation sandstones in the SW Songliao Basin through a combination of petrology, geochemistry, and electron-probe analysis. The study is expected to assist in understanding the mineralization mechanism of the uranium deposits and the next phase of exploration in the basin.

2. Geological Setting

The Songliao Basin is a strip-shaped Mesozoic rifted sedimentary basin that developed on the folded basement of the Paleozoic geosyncline [15,32,33] (Figure 1a). The Songliao Basin is surrounded tectonically by a series of mountains, with the Zhangguangcai Mountains (ZGCM) in the southeast and the Lesser Xing’an Mountains (LXAM) in the northeast, both of which developed Late Triassic to Middle Jurassic igneous rocks [34,35,36]; the Great Xing’an Mountains (GXAM) in the west, which mainly developed Late Paleozoic and Mesozoic granites and volcanic rocks [37,38,39]; and the Kangfa Hill areas in the south, which are part of the Yanshan orogenic belt in the northern margin of the North China Craton [40]. As the main sources of the Songliao Basin, these mountains have played a significant role in its evolution and development [27,28,29,30,31]. The study area is situated southwest of the Songliao Basin and is one of the seven basin’s structural units (Figure 1b).
The basin’s basement consists mostly of Precambrian to Palaeozoic metamorphic rocks, Palaeozoic to Mesozoic granites, Palaeozoic sedimentary strata, and Late Jurassic intermediate-felsic volcanic rocks [15,41,42,43,44] (Figure 1c). The Cretaceous deposits that cover the entire study area constitute the principal sedimentary caprocks. The Songliao Basin was formed and filled through four tectonic phases [20] (Figure 2): mantle upwelling, rifting, post-rift thermal subsidence, and structural inversion. In these four phases, three major tectonostratigraphic sequences were generated [14,45,46,47]: (i) The pre-rift and syn-rift tectonostratigraphic sequences (150–125 Ma), composed of the Huoshiling (J3h), Shahezi (K1sh), and Yingcheng (K1yc) Formations, were formed in separate rift grabens [20]. (ii) The post-rift tectonostratigraphic sequences (125–79.1 Ma) consist of the Dengloukou (K1d), Quantou (K1-2q), Qingshankou (K2qn), Yaojia (K2y), and Nenjiang (K2n) Formations [20]; (iii) the tectonic inversion sequences (79.1–23 Ma) consist of the Sifangtai (K2s), Mingshui (K2m), and Yi’an Formations (E2-3y) [20,22].
The Yaojia Formation is a set of 100–200 m thick inland clastic sedimentary formations widely distributed in the region. The burial depth of the Yaojia Formation is generally 300–600 m and can be greater than 800 m locally. In general, it is comprised of sandy conglomerates, gray, gray-white medium- to coarse-grained sandstones, purplish-red siltstones, and reddish-purple mudstones [48]. According to exploration in the study area, uranium mineralization is mainly found in coarse-grained sandbodies of the Yaojia Formation [21,26].
Minerals 13 01053 g001
Figure 1. Geological maps of the Songliao Basin and the study area. (a) Structural map of northeast China (modified after Bonnetti et al. [20]); (b) Structural map of the Songliao Basin (modified after Scott et al. [49]; Zhao et al. [50]); (c) Geological map of the SW Songliao Basin.
Figure 1. Geological maps of the Songliao Basin and the study area. (a) Structural map of northeast China (modified after Bonnetti et al. [20]); (b) Structural map of the Songliao Basin (modified after Scott et al. [49]; Zhao et al. [50]); (c) Geological map of the SW Songliao Basin.
Minerals 13 01053 g001
Minerals 13 01053 g002
Figure 2. Palaeozoic to Cenozoic tectono-stratigraphic evolution of the Songliao Basin (modified after Bonnetti et al. [20]).
Figure 2. Palaeozoic to Cenozoic tectono-stratigraphic evolution of the Songliao Basin (modified after Bonnetti et al. [20]).
Minerals 13 01053 g002

3. Samples and Materials

Twenty fresh sandstone samples of the Yaojia Formation were collected from three representative drill holes (ZK1-4, ZK1-6, and ZK1-5) in the study area (Figure 1). Table 1 and Figure 3 provide details about the sampling sites. These samples were primarily composed of gray-white or light-red, medium-grained sandstones. The samples were examined using a combination of thin-section identification, whole-rock geochemistry, and electron probe analysis.
The thin-section petrographic identification was performed using a Nikon 100 N electron microscope in the electron microscopy laboratory of the East China University of Technology. At least 300 grains have been counted in each thin section. The Gazzi-Dickinson method was used to analyze the sandstone’s characteristics [51].
The whole-rock geochemistry analysis was conducted at the Beijing Test and Analysis Center of the Nuclear Industry. Fresh samples were pulverized to 200 mesh for later work after the removal of altered surfaces. The major elements were assayed with an X-ray fluorescence spectrometer (XRF). Axios-Max XRF was used for testing the prepared samples, and the method used was ME-XRF26D. Blank, duplicate, and standard samples (GBW07105, NCSDC47009, SARM-4, and SARM-5) were used for monitoring during the testing process. In general, the analytical accuracy was greater than 5%, and the detection limit was less than 0.01%. Loss of ignition was assessed by heating the sample powder to 1000 °C for one hour [52].
At the Beijing Test and Analysis Center of the Nuclear Industry, trace elements were assayed with a NexION 300D ICP-MS. In a Teflon container, approximately 50 mg of whole rock powder was dissolved in HNO3-HF distillate. The solution was maintained at 185 °C for three days in an oven. Once the HF had been evaporated from the solution, deionized water was used to dilute the final solution to 100.0 g after adding the Rh internal standard solution, so that the concentration of Rh in the final solution became 10 ng/mL. The elemental composition of the solution was determined by ICP-MS. Overall, the precision was greater than 5%.
Representative ore-bearing samples were selected and subjected to electron microprobe experiments for uranium mineral composition identification. The electron probe experiment was conducted at the State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Resources and Environment, East China University of Technology, Jiangxi Province, China. The instrument used in the experiment is the JXA-8100M electron probe and its accompanying IncaEnergy spectrometer. The test conditions are: an acceleration voltage of 15.0 kV, a probe current of 20.0 nA, and a beam spot diameter <2 μm. The testing procedure was conducted in accordance with the national standard (GB/T 15617-2002) [53].

4. Results

4.1. Petrography

Petrological characteristics indicate that the detrital particles are poorly sorted, with sub-angular to angular roundness (Figure 4), which is indicative of proximal deposition. Table 2 provides statistics on the mineral composition of sandstone clasts. According to a petrological investigation, it was determined that the Yaojia Formation sandstone is predominantly composed of lithic sandstone and feldspar lithic sandstone. There are approximately 80%–90% grains in the sandstone, predominantly quartz, feldspar, and lithic fragments. It is noteworthy that the content of lithic fragments ranges from 24% to 68%; the content of quartz ranges from 24% to 61%; and the content of feldspar ranges from 8% to 16%. Quartz is dominated by monocrystalline quartz, most of which has eroded edges with no wavy extinction and other characteristics, indicating a volcanic origin (Figure 4a,b). Feldspar consists mostly of potassium feldspar and plagioclase, the majority of which has been sericitized (Figure 4c). There is a wide variety of lithic fragments, including felsic volcanic lithic fragments, granite fragments, polycrystalline quartz fragments, and a small amount of metamorphic lithic fragments (Figure 4d–f). The cements are well-developed in the sandstones, with a content of 8% to 15%. Carbonate, clay minerals, and ferruginous cement comprise the majority of cements. The carbonates are primarily composed of calcite and dolomite. Calcite metasomatizes quartz and feldspar frequently (Figure 5a). The dominant clay mineral is kaolinite, which develops between detrital particles in the form of fish scales or book leaves (Figure 5b). There is also a small amount of illite and chlorite present. Ferruginous cement is primarily composed of hematite and limonite. Pyrite and organic matter are also common in the studied samples. Pyrite is developed in framboidal, colloidal, or euhedral-sub-euhedral forms (Figure 5c,d). The organic matter is primarily composed of carbonaceous fragments and bitumen (Figure 5e,f). Pyrite is visible occupying the cell cavities of carbonaceous fragments. In the Qt-F-L and Qm-F-Lt discrimination diagrams, the Yaojia Formation samples fall into the recycled orogenic and transitional arc regions (Figure 6).

4.2. Geochemistry

4.2.1. Major Elements

The geochemical characteristics of major elements in the Yaojia Formation samples are listed in Table 3. The most abundant element in the samples was SiO2, indicating that the sandstones are rich in quartz or silica-containing minerals. The SiO2 content in these samples ranges from 50.44% to 81.49% (avg. 72.95%). The Al2O3 content of sandstone is an effective indicator of clay alteration. The Al2O3 content of the samples ranges from 7.14% to 13.09% (avg. 10.04%), indicating that they had been subjected to relatively strong alteration. The Fe2O3T content ranges from 0.74% to 4.86% (avg. 2.24%); the MgO content ranges from 0.24% to 5.45% (avg. 1.36%); the CaO content ranges from 0.14% to 11.65% (avg. 2.87%); the Na2O content ranges from 0.13% to 1% (avg. 0.48%); the K2O content ranges from 2.39% to 3.39% (avg. 3.02%); the MnO content ranges from 0 to 0.30% (avg. 0.07%); the TiO2 content ranges from 0.18% to 0.58% (avg. 0.31%); the P2O5 content ranges from 0.06% to 0.49% (avg. 0.11%); the average SiO2+Al2O3 content is 82.99%; the average SiO2/Al2O3 ratio is 7.30; the average K2O+Na2O content is 3.49%; and the average K2O/Na2O ratio is 8.93. The loss on ignition (LOI) content varies widely, ranging from 2.60% to 17.03% (avg. 6.45%). The cause of this phenomenon may be due to a high carbonate content or to later weathering. The indices of chemical weathering, CIA (Chemical Index of Alternation) [54], CIW (Chemical Index of Weathering) [55], and ICV (Index of Compositional Variability) [56], range from 58.41 to 74.80 (avg. 67.80), from 74.52 to 95.74 (avg. 87.08), and from 0.63 to 3.15 (avg. 1.09), respectively.

4.2.2. Trace Elements

Table 4 lists the results of tests conducted on trace elements in the samples. The large ion lithophile elements such as Cs, Rb, Sr, and Ba have average contents of 4.93 ppm, 101.48 ppm, 223.94 ppm, and 693.40 ppm, respectively. High field strength elements such as Sc, Y, Nb, Ta, Zr, Hf, and Th have average contents of 4.29 ppm, 23.36 ppm, 10.95 ppm, 0.84 ppm, 100.39 ppm, 3.13 ppm, and 9.19 ppm, respectively. The normalized trace elements of the upper continental crust (UCC) with reference to Taylor and McLennan (1985) [6] were applied, and the curve patterns were almost identical across all samples, with abundances approximately the same as those of the upper crustal elements (Figure 7). Moreover, these samples are extremely abundant in U, indicating a significant potential for mineralization. According to the average ratios of La/Sc, Th/Sc, Cr/Th, and Co/Th, the provenance is mainly situated in the upper crustal felsic source area [6,57] (Table 5).

4.2.3. Rare Earth Elements

The total content of the REEs (ΣREE) in the Yaojia Formation samples ranges from 91.65 to 207.98 ppm (avg. 134.23 ppm). Specifically, the LREE content ranges from 80.27 to 184.67 ppm (avg. 119.21 ppm), whereas the HREE content varies from 11.38 ppm to 23.31 ppm (avg. 15.02 ppm). The ratio of LREE/HREE varies between 6.91 and 8.93 (avg. 7.92) (Table 6), indicating that the LREEs are enriched, the HREEs are deficient, and the light and heavy REEs are highly fractionated.
The ratio of LaN/YbN varies between 6.62 and 9.58 (avg. 7.71), the ratio of LaN/SmN ranges from 3.17 to 4.37 (avg. 4.11), the ratio of GdN/YbN ranges from 1.06 to 1.58 (avg. 1.24), the δEu varies between 0.49 and 0.84 (avg. 0.57), whereas the δCe varies between 0.85 and 0.94 (avg. 0.89). Chondrite-normalized REE patterns are clearly right-sloping with obvious negative Eu anomalies (Figure 8a). The similarity between the curve patterns of each sample indicates that the REE content varies synchronously. In combination with the normalized REE distribution curve of the North American Shale (NASC), the characteristic curves of the samples are almost horizontal (Figure 8b). It is generally consistent with the characteristics of the NASC, which indicate that the source rocks of the Yaojia Formation originated from the UCC.

4.3. Uranium Minerals

4.3.1. Uranium Mineral Types

A quantitative analysis of the electron microprobe (Table 7) indicates that the main uranium mineral type is pitchblende, with a small amount of coffinite. The content of UO2 in pitchblende is very high, ranging from 71.34% to 81.60% (avg. 76.55%); SiO2 content ranges from 0.99% to 4.81% (avg. 3.08%); TiO2 content ranges from 0.62% to 3.90% (avg. 2.12%); and CaO content ranges from 0.89% to 3.84% (avg. 2.18%). In the study area, it is the mineral type with the highest content of uranium. The content of UO2 in coffinite ranges from 59.36% to 69.31% (avg. 63.56%); the content of SiO2 ranges from 11.66% to 18.93% (avg. 15.35%). There are small amounts of Al2O3, Y2O3, and FeO in coffinite. There is an average content of Al2O3, Y2O3, and FeO of 1.58%, 0.18%, and 2.10%, respectively. In comparison to pitchblende, coffinite has a relatively high SiO2 content and a relatively low UO2 content.

4.3.2. Characteristics of Uranium Minerals

Analysis of EMPA and BSE images in the study area reveals two primary forms of uranium present: independent uranium minerals and adsorption uranium. In general, their distribution patterns can be categorized as follows:
(1)
Adsorption Uranium
Adsorption uranium is one of the most prevalent forms of uranium in the study area. Uranium is primarily absorbed by clay minerals in sandstone. A high content of clay minerals is preferable for uranium enrichment, as they have strong adsorption properties [60] (Figure 9a,b). Clay minerals are relatively abundant in the study area. In BSE images, uranium is adsorbed by clay minerals and distributed in vein or disseminated form.
(2)
Uranium Minerals in Fissures and Dissolved Pores of Clastic Particles
The dissolution of detrital particles such as quartz and feldspar in an alkaline environment results in the formation of SiO2, whereas the uranyl ion (UO2)2+ in oxygen-uranium bearing fluids reacts with the SiO2 generated from detrital particles to produce coffinite [61]. Therefore, uranium minerals can be observed in BSE images distributed in the form of stellate, irregular granular, or vein, that fill in the fissures, edges, and dissolved pores of clastic particles (Figure 9c,d).
(3)
Uranium Minerals Associated with Pyrite
Observations from the field indicate that pyrite is highly developed around the ore stratum, which is closely linked to uranium mineralization. This is further demonstrated by BSE images, which show that a large number of uranium minerals are associated with pyrite, predominantly as pitchblende or coffinite developing around framboidal or colloidal pyrite (Figure 10a–c). It can be seen that pyrite and pitchblende are simultaneously generated in the organic matter cell cavity (Figure 10d). Under oxidizing conditions, uranium migrates in the hexavalent state (U6+), whereas under reducing conditions, it precipitates toward the tetravalent state (U4+) to form uranium minerals. Since pyrite is a potent reducing agent, it provides an excellent reducing environment for oxygenated uranium-bearing fluids. Pyrite and uranium minerals are in close symbiosis due to its ability to reduce U6+ in fluids to stable U4+, enrich, and precipitate.

5. Discussion

5.1. Sedimentary Environment

During the depositional periods, certain multivalent trace elements are highly sensitive to changes in sedimentary environments, such as changes in the depth and salinity of paleosedimentary water and the redox conditions. They do not readily migrate during diagenesis, and the degree of enrichment of these elements in sediment is controlled by environmental conditions. Therefore, these elements and their ratios can be used as key indicators of sedimentary environments with a high degree of precision and accuracy [62,63,64,65]. The Sr/Ba, V/(V+Ni), V/Cr, Ni/Co, and (Cu+Mo)/Zn ratios are shown in Table 8.
The Sr/Ba ratio is typically used to evaluate the salinity of sedimentary water. In general, Sr content in freshwater environments ranges from 200 to 300 ppm, and in saltwater environments, it ranges from 800 to 1000 ppm [66]. As determined from the study of Sr/Ba ratios in terrestrial sedimentary basins in China, Sr/Br < 1 indicates a freshwater environment, whereas Sr/Ba > 1 indicates a saltwater environment [66]. The Sr content of all Yaojia Formation samples is below 300 ppm, except for six samples. The average Sr value is 223.94 ppm (n = 20). All samples, except one, have Sr/Ba ratios below 1, indicating that the Yaojia Formation was deposited in freshwater.
The elements V, Ni, Cr, and Co hardly migrate during diagenesis. They are readily soluble in oxidizing conditions but less soluble in reducing conditions. Thus, they preserve the original sedimentary records and serve as a marker for restoring the oxidation-reduction environment of paleo-water bodies [67]. In general, the V/(V+Ni) ratio is used to determine the intensity of bottom water body stratification during deposition [68]. A V/(V+Ni) ratio between 0.4 and 0.6 indicates weak stratification, between 0.6 and 0.84 implies moderate stratification, and a ratio above 0.84 denotes intense stratification. In the Yaojia Formation, the V/(V+Ni) ratio varies between 0.62 and 0.95 (n = 20, avg. 0.82), which indicates a moderately stratified bottom water body with smooth circulation.
V and Cr share a similar characteristic in that they are readily enriched in sediments in reducing environments and readily soluble in water in oxidizing environments. Consequently, the V/Cr ratio is essential to determining redox conditions [69]. A V/Cr < 2.0 signifies an oxygen-rich environment, 2 < V/Cr < 4.25 denotes a sub-oxygen-rich environment, and V/Cr > 4.25 implies an anoxic environment [70]. With the exception of an abnormally high value (12.02), the V/Cr ratio of the Yaojia Formation sandstones ranges between 1.8 and 5.26 (n = 19, avg. 2.88), indicating that the Yaojia Formation was deposited in a sub-oxygenated environment.
According to Jones and Manning (1994) [70], a Ni/Co ratio below 5.00 indicates an oxygen-rich environment, between 5.00 and 7.00 indicates a sub-oxygen-rich environment, and higher than 7.00 implies an anoxic environment. Based on the Ni/Co ratios of the Yaojia Formation sandstone samples (0.99~2.46, avg. 1.65), it appears that they were deposited in an oxygen-rich environment.
Moreover, since the content of Cu and Zn in sediments is mainly controlled by redox and not influenced by diagenetic changes, the (Cu+Mo)/Zn ratio can also be used as an oxidation-reduction parameter. Lower values indicate a higher degree of oxidation [71]. Generally, a ratio of (Cu+Mo)/Zn less than 0.55 indicates a relatively oxygen-rich environment. The (Cu+Mo)/Zn ratio of the Yaojia Formation ranges from 0.05 to 1.21. The other values are all less than 0.55 except for the two high ones, which indicate a relatively oxygen-rich environment.
In conclusion, the Sr/Ba, V/(V+Ni), V/Cr, Ni/Co, and (Cu+Mo)/Zn ratios of these samples indicate that the Yaojia Formation was deposited in a sub- to oxygen-rich freshwater environment with a moderately stratified bottom water body.

5.2. Weathering-Alteration Degree

The discrimination of weathering-alteration degrees in sedimentary rocks is greatly affected by sedimentary recycling [72]. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate the sedimentary recycling of samples before determining the degree of weathering-alteration. As weathered products from the source rocks are transported and deposited, sedimentary recycling may accumulate certain elements (Zr) and alter their composition [10]. Generally, both Th and Sc are challenging to dissolve in water, and the Th/Sc ratio does not vary during sedimentary recycling. Therefore, it is frequently used to study compositional changes in source rocks [73]. Zircon is the most prevalent Zr-bearing mineral in sedimentary rocks. It is highly stable and accumulates in sediments as a result of sedimentary recycling. Zr/Sc will gradually increase with sedimentary recycling and zircon enrichment and will not be affected by late hydrothermal dilution [74]. Consequently, the Zr/Sc and Th/Sc ratios are used to determine the changes in sediment composition [75]. In the Zr/Sc-Th/Sc diagram (Figure 11a), the majority of sandstone sample spots are located along the compositional evolution line and exhibit strong positive correlations, indicating that the Yaojia Formation sediments have not undergone sedimentary recycling and are primarily controlled by source rocks. The 15Al2O3-Zr-300TiO2 diagram further supports this idea. In the 15Al2O3-Zr-300TiO2 diagram, the sandstone samples are situated close to the PAAS point with no changes in Al2O3/Zr ratios, suggesting the poor recycled nature of the Yaojia Formation sandstones and comparatively rapid deposition (Figure 11b) [76,77].
The content of unstable elemental oxides such as CaO, Na2O, and K2O in the sediments is closely linked to the chemical weathering of the source area and is commonly used to quantitatively evaluate the paleoweathering conditions of the source areas [73,78,79]. The Chemical Index of Alteration (CIA) can determine the degree of weathering-alteration in source rocks [54]. The CIA trend may also be indicative of paleoclimate characteristics during the deposition period. CIA values of 50–60 indicate low weathering intensity with a cold and dry climate; CIA values of 60–80 imply moderate weathering intensity with a warm and humid climate; and CIA values of 80–100 denote intense weathering intensity with a hot and wet climate [28]. The formula for calculating CIA is: CIA = {n(Al2O3)/[n(Al2O3) + n(CaO*) + n(Na2O) + n(K2O)]} × 100 [54]. CaO* denotes only the CaO content of silicate minerals, excluding the CaO content in carbonate and apatite [80]. In this instance, an adjustment must be made to the measured CaO content when carbonates and apatite are present [80]. CaO* is calculated and corrected in this study using the following formula: n(CaO remaining) = n(CaO) − n(P2O5) × 10/3 [54]. In the case where n(CaO remaining) is less than n(Na2O), n(CaO remaining) should be adopted as CaO*. Otherwise, n(Na2O) should be adopted as CaO*. The calculated CIA value of the samples by the formula is listed in Table 3. The CIA values vary between 58.41 and 74.8 (avg. 67.80), indicating moderate weathering intensity.
The Index of Compositional Variability (ICV) is expressed as follows: ICV = [n(Fe2O3) + n(K2O) + n(Na2O) + n(CaO*) + n(MgO) + n(MnO) + n(TiO2)]/n(Al2O3) [56]. If ICV < 1, the clastic rocks are abundant in clay minerals, indicating that the sediments underwent sedimentary recycling or were first deposited under intense weathering; otherwise, if ICV > 1, the clastic rocks contain few clay minerals, reflecting that the sediments were first deposited during tectonic activity [56,81,82]. Among the Yaojia Formation sandstone samples, ICV values range from 0.63 to 3.15 (avg. 1.09), but sixteen samples have ICV values that are less than 1. In accordance with the Zr/Sc-Th/Sc and 15Al2O3-Zr-300TiO2 diagrams (Figure 11), the Yaojia Formation sandstones have not been subjected to sedimentary recycling. The ICV values therefore indicate that the sandstones were first deposited under intense weathering. The Chemical Index of Weathering (CIW) is used to measure the degree of chemical weathering in the provenance. The CIW is calculated as follows: CIW = {n(Al2O3)/[n(Al2O3) + n(CaO*) + n(Na2O)]} × 100 [55]. A value greater than 85 indicates intense chemical weathering. The Yaojia Formation samples have CIW values varying between 74.52 and 95.74 (avg. 87.08). Both CIW and ICV demonstrate that the source rocks have been subjected to intense weathering.
As demonstrated by the CIA, ICV, and CIW indices, the source rocks of the Yaojia Formation have undergone moderate to intense weathering-alteration, and the palaeoclimate of the source area is generally humid and warm.

5.3. Source Rocks

The geochemical properties of sedimentary rocks are most indicative of their provenance characteristics [6]. Trace elements (such as Sc, Y, Zr, Nb, Hf, Th, etc.) in sedimentary rocks are commonly inactive, rarely changed, and difficult to dissolve in water during sedimentation [83,84,85]. Therefore, they may provide valuable information about the geochemical behavior of the source rocks and can be used to identify provenances. In addition, REEs are generally considered to be non-transportable. The REE content in sediments is generally restricted by the abundance of REE in the source rocks of the provenances. Transport, sedimentation, tectonic settings, and diagenesis have a limited impact on the REE content of sediments. The REE distribution patterns in sedimentary rocks will not be significantly altered by these processes. Therefore the presence of REE in sediments can provide a clear indication of the characteristics of the source rocks [6].
The TiO2-Zr diagram can be used to differentiate between mafic, intermediate, and felsic igneous rocks as well as the components of the source rocks [86]. The Yaojia Formation sandstone samples have TiO2 contents that vary between 0.18 and 0.58% (avg. 0.31%), while the Zr contents vary between 71.60 and 151.00 ppm (avg. 100.39 ppm). According to the TiO2-Zr diagram, all Yaojia Formation sandstone samples are located in the felsic igneous rock region (Figure 12a). Generally, Sc, Ni, Cr, and Co tend to accumulate in basic rocks, while La, Th, Hf, Zr, and REE tend to accumulate in acidic rocks [57]. In the La/Sc-Co/Th diagram [84], the La/Sc ratios of the Yaojia Formation sandstones are widely dispersed (ranging from 4.14 to 12.29, avg. 7.34), whereas the Co/Th ratios are typically low, ranging from 0.16 to 2.54 (avg. 0.82). Most of the samples fall within the regions of felsic volcanic rock, granodiorite, and granite (Figure 12b) [84]. In the Th/Sc-Cr/Th diagram, the samples primarily fall within the region of felsic volcanic rock-granite (Figure 12c) [87]. In the La/Th-La/Yb diagram, the samples are located close to the region of the average upper crust (Figure 12d) [88]. The Yaojia Formation sandstones originated primarily from felsic igneous rocks of the UCC, based on the aforementioned characteristics. The REE content of the NASC is frequently used as an indicator of the REE compositional characteristics of the upper crust [6]. The NASC normalized REE distribution curves of the Yaojia Formation are nearly horizontal and close to unity (Figure 8b), indicating that the REE composition of the Yaojia Formation is comparable to that of the NASC and that the source rocks originated mainly from the UCC.

5.4. Tectonic Setting

The geochemical properties of sedimentary rocks may provide valuable insight into the composition of the source rock as well as the tectonic setting of the source areas [83,89]. Bhatia (1983, 1985) [89,90] classified basin tectonic types based on the character of the crust into four categories: oceanic island arc (OA), continental island arc (CA), active continental margin (ACM), and passive margin (PM). Major elements, such as Al2O3, SiO2, TiO2, Fe2O3T, and MgO, have relatively high stability. In contrast, K2O and Na2O are highly unstable due to the considerable effects of potassium metasomatism and Na+ loss during weathering, deposition, and diagenesis. Furthermore, calcite cement contributes the majority of the CaO content. Therefore, in this paper, the contents and ratios of the stable oxides Al2O3, SiO2, TiO2, Fe2O3T, and MgO are used to distinguish source areas and tectonic settings. In the TiO2-(Fe2O3T+MgO) diagram, the majority of the Yaojia Formation samples fall within the ACM field, with a tendency to the PM field, and three samples out of any of the fields (Figure 13a). The Al2O3/SiO2-(Fe2O3T+MgO) diagram shows that samples mostly fall within the ACM region (Figure 13b).
A comparison of the geochemical characteristics of sandstones from the Yaojia Formation with those from various tectonic settings is presented in Table 9. Except for δEu, the ΣREE, LREE/HREE, La/Yb, and (La/Yb)N values in the Yaojia Formation are similar to their counterparts in the CA environment, while Nb, Y, Nd, V, Ni, Ba/Sr, and Nb/Y have similar characteristics to their counterparts in the ACM environment.
In general, trace elements (Co, Sc, Th, and Zr) and rare earth elements (La) are weakly active, and tectonic activity and diagenetic processes have a negligible effect on their fractionation during transport and deposition. Therefore, they may provide information about the original sediments as well as distinguish sedimentary tectonic settings [6,83,90,91]. In the La-Th-Sc diagram, the Yaojia Formation sandstone samples mainly fall within the region of the ACM and PM (Figure 14a); in the Th-Sc-Zr/10 diagram and Th-Co-Zr/10 diagram, the samples mostly fall within the region of the ACM (Figure 14b,c).
There is a direct correlation between the composition and geochemistry of the sedimentary rocks and the tectonic background of their provenances. The tectonic environment indicated by the geochemical characteristics of the samples in the above analysis reveals the tectonic background at the time of source rock formation [92], suggesting the complex tectonic background for the formation of rocks in the source area to some degree. Based on the results of the discrimination of the major and trace elements in the Yaojia Formation, the primary sources are upper crustal felsic igneous rocks in the ACM and CA environments.

5.5. Provenance Analysis

The Yaojia Formation in the SW Songliao Basin is characterized by sandy conglomerates, gray and gray-white medium- to coarse-grained sandstones, purplish-red siltstones, and reddish-purple mudstones [48]. Previous studies have identified the sedimentary environment as predominantly fluvial and deltaic facies [48], which are indicative of relatively strong hydrodynamic conditions. It is clear from the petrological and geochemical characteristics of the Yaojia Formation that it is a proximal deposition, with the source rocks being predominantly felsic igneous rocks. The sediments are mainly from recycled orogenic and transitional arc regions (Figure 6). Accordingly, the GXAM, ZGCM, and Kangfa Hilly areas adjacent to the SW Songliao Basin may be potential sources for the Yaojia Formation sediments.
The chemical characteristics of REEs in sedimentary rocks are similar. Since they can enter sediments rapidly and are difficult to migrate, they can preserve the geochemical characteristics of their source areas in the sediments [93]. As a result, REE characteristics are reliable indicators of sediment sources. The geochemistry of REEs in the Yaojia Formation sandstone exhibits enrichment of LREEs and depletion of HREEs. It is evident from Figure 8a that the partition curve exhibits a right-sloping type with obvious negative Eu anomalies. To further identify the main provenance of the Yaojia Formation sandstones during the deposition period, this paper conducted a statistical analysis of the REE partitioning pattern of igneous rocks from potential provenances around the SW Songliao Basin and compared the results with those of the sandstones from the study area [94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111]. As shown in Figure 15, the Yaojia Formation sandstones have similar REE partitioning patterns to those of the igneous rocks from the GXAM. Both exhibit a right-sloping type with obvious negative Eu anomalies, suggesting a close relationship between the sandstones of the study area and the igneous rocks of the GXAM. Accordingly, the sediments of the Yaojia Formation may have originated from felsic igneous rocks within the southern GXAM, which is consistent with their geographical location.
The GXAM are part of the Xing’an-Mongolian Orogenic Belt [99,112,113,114], which has undergone complex tectonic evolution during the Paleozoic and Mesozoic periods. During the Paleozoic, the GXAM experienced the tectonic evolution of the collocation of multiple microlandmasses in the Paleo-Asian tectonic domain. During the Mesozoic, the GXAM experienced the south-eastward subduction of the Mongolian Okhotsk ocean plate [115]. The GXAM is characterized by the large-scale distribution of Mesozoic and Paleozoic igneous rocks. The igneous rocks exposed in the GXAM consist primarily of granite, rhyolite, monzogranite, and granodiorite, with ages ranging from 120 to 165 Ma [37,99,104,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121] and 240–280 Ma [108,122,123,124,125,126,127,128]. They have the properties of ACM and CA tectonic settings [28,113,129,130]. This is consistent with what the geochemical parameters of the Yaojia Formation sandstone samples show about the tectonic background. Zang et al. [131] determined that the detrital zircons of the Yaojia Formation sandstones are concentrated at 110 to 140 Ma and 240 to 260 Ma, respectively. This is generally consistent with the ages of igneous rocks exposed in the southern GXAM, thereby confirming the provenance of the Yaojia Formation. Based on the petrography, geochemistry, and previous detrital zircon U-Pb age evidence, it can be inferred that the Yaojia Formation sandstones in the SW Songliao Basin primarily originated from Late Paleozoic and Mesozoic felsic igneous rocks from the southern GXAM.
In general, uranium sources for sandstone-type uranium deposits are distributed in the provenance area, the sedimentary cover, and the ore-bearing strata themselves [26]. Thus, the felsic igneous rocks exposed in the southern GXAM may serve as a significant source of uranium mineralization. According to Zhang (2006) [25], the igneous rocks in the southern GXAM are highly abundant in uranium, with uranium content ranging from 5.2 to 9.1 ppm, which is substantially greater than the average uranium content of the upper crust (2.8 ppm) [6]. Furthermore, the uranium leaching rate of the igneous rocks in the southern GXAM ranged from 6.55% to 37.5%, with an average of 21.85%, reflecting the phenomenon of uranium migration [25]. Consequently, the igneous rocks of the source areas are uranium-rich and have a high rate of uranium leaching, making them a favorable external uranium source for the Yaojia Formation.
In the Late Cretaceous, the upper mantle of the Songliao region gradually chilled due to the westward subduction of the Pacific Plate and the weakening of thermal convection [41]. The lithospheric temperature of the Songliao Basin gradually decreased, resulting in thermal precipitation. As a result, the study area entered a period of large-scale depression. During this period, the GXAM experienced rapid uplift (97–90 Ma) [132]. Moreover, northeastern China experienced an O2-rich environment at 91 Ma [132], which resulted in intense chemical weathering and denudation of igneous rocks in the southern GXAM, providing sufficient uranium-rich clastic materials for the Yaojia Formation. The clastic materials were transported by surface water to the basin for sedimentation, which resulted in uranium pre-enrichment in the Yaojia Formation. Subsequently, at the end of the formation of the Nenjiang Formation, the Songliao Basin was tectonically reversed by extrusion, and the Yaojia Formation was uplifted and exposed to the surface [30]. In the meantime, atmospheric precipitation leached uranium from the source rocks in the provenances. As a result, a large amount of oxygenated uranium-bearing fluids was produced and transported to the ore-bearing target layer along the basin boundary, providing the ore bodies with the necessary uranium for mineralization. The Yaojia Formation is characterized by an abundance of pyrite and organic matter, which provides a rich source of reductants for uranium mineralization [133]. This allows the U6+ in oxygenated uranium-bearing fluids to be continuously reduced to form pitchblende and coffinite [134], while remaining closely symbiotic with pyrite and organic matter. Additionally, the abundant clay minerals in the Yaojia Formation play a significant role in uranium mineralization since they can adsorb uranium in the fluids, resulting in the formation of adsorption uranium.

6. Conclusions

According to the petrography study, whole-rock geochemical analysis, and electron probe analysis of the Yaojia Formation sandstones in the SW Songliao Basin, the following conclusions can be drawn:
  • Pitchblende is the predominant uranium mineral in the study area, along with some coffinite. Uranium minerals are closely related to pyrite, organic matter, and clay minerals.
  • The Sr/Ba, V/(V+Ni), V/Cr, Ni/Co and (Cu+Mo)/Zn ratios of the samples indicate that the Yaojia Formation was deposited in a sub- to oxygen-rich freshwater environment with a moderately stratified bottom water body and smooth circulation.
  • In accordance with the Zr/Sc-Th/Sc and 15Al2O3-Zr-300TiO2 diagrams, the Yaojia Formation sediments have not undergone sedimentary recycling and are primarily controlled by source rocks. The CIA, ICV, and CIW values suggest that the source rocks have experienced moderate to intense weathering.
  • Based on the detrital components and geochemical characteristics of the Yaojia Formation samples, it is concluded that the Yaojia Formation sediments primarily originated from felsic igneous rocks in the upper crust under the tectonic settings of ACM and CA. The Mesozoic and Late Paleozoic felsic igneous rocks exposed in the southern GXAM are the main sources.
  • As well as providing sediments to the study area, the uranium-rich felsic igneous rocks in the southern GXAM also provided a long-term, stable, and ideal source of uranium. The uranium in the source rocks was transported to the sedimentary basin by oxygenated uranium-bearing fluids and precipitated into the ore-bearing layers.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.N.; Funding acquisition, F.N. and D.Y.; Writing-original draft preparation, M.C.; Investigation and sampling, F.X., Z.Y. and D.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. U2244205, U2067202, 41772068, and 42202095).

Data Availability Statement

Data is contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

We thank Geological Team No. 243 of the CNNC for the help in field sampling.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Naiman, Y. The detrital record of orogenesis: A review of approaches and techniques used in the Himalayan sedimentary basins. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2006, 74, 1–72. [Google Scholar]
  2. Dickinson, W.R.; Gehrels, G.E. Sediment Delivery to the Cordilleran Foreland Basin: Insights from U-Pb Ages of Detrital Zircons in Upper Jurassic and Cretaceous Strata of the Colorado Plateau. Am. J. Sci. 2008, 308, 1041–1082. [Google Scholar]
  3. Moreno, C.J.; Horton, B.K.; Caballero, V.; Mora, A.; Parra, M.; Sierra, J. Depositional and provenance record of the Paleogene transition from foreland to hinterland basin evolution during Andean orogenesis, northern Middle Magdalena Valley Basin, Colombia. J. South Am. Earth Sci. 2011, 32, 246–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Thomas, W.A. Detrital-Zircon Geochronology and Sedimentary Provenance. Lithosphere 2011, 3, 304–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Pereira, M.F.; Gama, C.; Chichorro, M.; Silva, J.B.; Gutierrez-Alonso, G.; Hofmann, M.; Linnemann, U.; Gartner, A. Evidence for Multi-Cycle Sedimentation and Provenance Constraints from Detrital Zircon U-Pb Ages: Triassic Strata of the Lusitanian Basin (Western Iberia). Tectonophysics 2016, 681, 318–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Taylor, S.R.; McLennan, S.M. The Continental Crust: Its Composition and Evolution: An Examination of the Geochemical Record Preserved in Sedimentary Rocks; Blackwell Scientific Publication: Oxford, UK, 1985; pp. 1–312. [Google Scholar]
  7. McLennan, S.M.; Taylor, S.R. Sedimentary rocks and crustal evolution: Tectonic setting and secular trends. J. Geol. 1991, 99, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Meng, E.; Xu, W.L.; Pei, F.P. Permian bimodal volcanism in the Zhangguangcai Range of eastern Heilongjiang Province, NE China: Zircon U-Pb-Hf isotopes and geochemical evidence. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2011, 41, 119–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Nagarajan, R.; Roy, P.D.; Kessler, F.L.; Jong, J.; Dayong, V.; Jonathan, M. An integrated study of geochemistry and mineralogy of the Upper Tukau Formation, Borneo Island (East Malaysia): Sediment provenance, depositional setting and tectonic implications. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2017, 143, 77–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. McLennan, S.M.; Taylor, S.R.; McCulloch, M.T.; Maynard, J.B. Geochemical and Nd-Sr isotopic composition of deep-sea turbidites: Crustal evolution and plate tectonic associations. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1990, 54, 2015–2050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Adeigbe, O.C.; Jimoh, Y.A. Geochemical fingerprints: Implication for provenance, tectonic and depositional settings of lower Benue trough sequence, Southeastern Nigeria. J. Environ. Sci. 2013, 3, 115–140. [Google Scholar]
  12. Ikhane, P.R.; Akintola, A.I.; Bankole, S.I.; Oyinboade, Y.T. Provenance studies of sandstone facies exposed near Igbile southwestern Nigeria: Petrographic and geochemical approach. J. Geogr. Geol. 2014, 6, 47–68. [Google Scholar]
  13. Ji, H.J.; Tao, H.F.; Qiu, J.L.; Wei, H.Y. Provenance of Middle Jurassic clastic rocks from the Bogda area of Eastern Tianshan and its implications. Int. Geol. Rev. 2019, 62, 1319–1342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Song, Y.; Ren, J.; Stepashko, A.A.; Li, J. Post-rift geodynamics of the Songliao Basin, NE China: Origin and signifificance of T11 (Coniacian) unconformity. Tectonophysics 2014, 634, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Chen, X.; Fang, X.; Guo, Q.; Xia, Y.; Pang, Y.; Sun, Y. Re-disscussion on uranium metallogenesis in Qianjiadian Sag, Songliao Basin. Acta Geol. Sin. 2008, 82, 553–561. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  16. Rong, H.; Jiao, Y.Q.; Wu, L.Q.; Ji, D.M.; Li, H.L.; Zhu, Q.; Cao, M.Q.; Wang, X.M.; Li, Q.C.; Xie, H.L. Epigenetic alteration and its constraints on uranium mineralization from Qianjiadian uranium deposit, Southern Songliao Basin. Earth Sci. 2016, 41, 153–166. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  17. Lin, J.R.; Tian, H.; Dong, W.M.; Xia, Y.L.; Zheng, J.W.; Qi, D.N.; Yao, S.C. Original geochemical types and epigenetic alteration of rocks in prospecting target stratum for uranium deposit in the southeast of Songliao Basin. Uran. Geol. 2009, 25, 202–207. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  18. Luo, Y.; He, Z.B.; Ma, H.F.; Sun, X. Metallogenic characteristics of Qianjiadian sandstone uranium deposit in the Songliao Basin. Miner. Dep. 2012, 31, 391–400. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  19. Bonnetti, C.; Cuney, M.; Michels, R.; Truche, L.; Malartre, F.; Liu, X.D.; Yang, J.X. The multiple roles of sulfate-reducing bacteria and Fe-Ti oxides in the genesis of the Bayinwula roll front-type uranium deposit, Erlian Basin, NE China. Econ. Geol. 2015, 110, 1059–1081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Bonnetti, C.; Liu, X.D.; Yan, Z.B.; Cuney, M.; Michels, R.; Malartre, F.; Mercadier, J.; Cai, J.F. Coupled uranium mineralisation and bacterial sulphate reduction for the genesis of the Baxingtu sandstone-hosted U deposit, SW Songliao Basin, NE China. Ore Geol. Rev. 2017, 82, 108–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Jiao, Y.Q.; Wu, L.Q.; Rong, H. Model of inner and outer reductive media within uranium reservoir sandstone of sandstone-type uranium deposits and its ore-controlling mechanism: Case studies in Daying and Qianjiadian uranium deposits. Earth Sci. 2018, 43, 459–474. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  22. Rong, H.; Jiao, Y.Q.; Wu, L.Q.; Wan, D.; Cui, Z.J.; Guo, X.J.; Jia, J.M. Origin of the carbonaceous debris and its implication for mineralization within the Qianjiadian uranium deposit, southern Songliao Basin. Ore Geol. Rev. 2019, 107, 336–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Rong, H.; Jiao, Y.Q.; Liu, X.F.; Wu, L.Q.; Jia, J.M.; Cao, M.Q. Effects of basic intrusions on REE mobility of sandstones and their geological significance: A case study from the Qianjiadian sandstone-hosted uranium deposit in the Songliao Basin. Appl. Geochem. 2020, 120, 104665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Rong, H.; Jiao, Y.Q.; Wu, L.Q.; Zhao, X.F.; Cao, M.Q.; Liu, W.H. Effects of igneous intrusions on diagenesis and reservoir quality of sandstone in the Songliao Basin, China. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2021, 127, 104980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zhang, Z.Q. Study on Metallogenic Conditions of Upper Cretaceous System for In-Situ Leachable Sandstone Type Uranium Deposit in South Songliao Basin; Northeastern University: Shenyang, China, 2006; pp. 54–56. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  26. Jiao, Y.Q.; Wu, L.Q.; Peng, Y.B. Sedimentary-tectonic setting of the deposition-type uranium deposits forming in the Paleo-Asian tectonic domain, North China. Earth Sci. Front. 2015, 22, 189–205. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  27. Xia, F.Y.; Jiao, Y.Q.; Rong, H.; Wu, L.Q.; Zhu, Q.; Wan, L.L. Geochemical characteristics and geological implication of sandstone from the Yaojia Formation in Qianjiadian uranium deposit, Southern Songliao Basin. Earth Sci. 2019, 44, 4235–4251. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  28. Xu, Z.L.; Wei, J.L.; Zeng, H.; Li, R.L.; Li, J.G.; Zhu, Q.; Zhang, B.; Cao, M.Q. Late Cretaceous palynoligical assemblage and its palaeoclimate record from Yaojia Formation in Qianjiadian Depression, Kailu Basin. Earth Sci. 2017, 42, 1725–1735. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  29. Shan, Z.B. Provenance analysis of the lower part of Yaojia Formation in the Qianjiadian uranium deposit of the southwestern Songliao Basin. Chin. J. Geol. 2020, 55, 1248–1265. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  30. Wang, D.P.; Liu, Z.J.; Liu, L. Evolution of the Songliao Basin and Sea Level Rise and Fall; Geological Publishing House: Beijing, China, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  31. Zou, C.N.; Xue, S.H.; Zhao, W.Z.; Li, M.; Wang, Y.C.; Liang, C.X.; Zhao, Z.K.; Zhao, Z.Y. Depositional sequences and forming conditions of the Cretaceous stratigraphic-lithologic reserviors in the Quantou-Nenjiang Formation, South Songliao Basin. Pet. Explor. Dev. 2004, 02, 14–17. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  32. Chen, F.H.; Zhang, M.Y.; Lin, C.S. Sedimentary environments and uranium enrichment in the Yaojia Formation, Qianjiadian depression, Kailu Basin. Sediment. Geol. Tethyan Geol. 2005, 03, 74–79. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  33. Wang, C.; Feng, Z.; Zhang, L.; Huang, Y.; Cao, K.; Wang, P.; Zhao, B. Cretaceous paleogeography and paleoclimate and the setting of SKI borehole sites in Songliao Basin, northeast China. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclim. Palaeoecol. 2013, 385, 17–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Yu, J.J.; Wang, F.; Xu, W.L.; Gao, F.H.; Pei, F.P. Early Jurassic mafic magmatism in the Lesser Xing’an–Zhangguangcai Range, NE China, and its tectonic implications: Constraints from zircon U–Pb chronology and geochemistry. Lithos 2012, 142–143, 256–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Ge, M.H.; Zhang, J.J.; Li, L.; Liu, K.; Ling, Y.Y.; Wang, J.M.; Wang, M. Geochronology and geochemistry of the Heilongjiang Complex and the granitoids from the Lesser Xing’an-Zhangguangcai Range: Implications for the late Paleozoic-Mesozoic tectonics of eastern NE China. Tectonophysics 2017, 717, 565–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Chen, X.; Hu, R.Z.; Liu, L.; Zhang, D.H. Petrogenesis of Jurassic granites linked to crustal growth above the subduction zone in the Lesser Xing’an Range (LXR), NE China. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2023, 243, 105524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Niu, S.D.; Li, S.R.; Huizenga, J.M.; Santosh, M.; Zhang, D.H.; Zeng, Y.J.; Li, Z.D.; Zhao, W.B. Zircon U-Pb geochronology and geochemistry of the intrusions associated with the Jiawula Ag-Pb-Zn deposit in the Great Xing’an Range, NE China and their implications for mineralization. Ore Geol. Rev. 2017, 86, 35–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ji, Z.; Ge, W.C.; Yang, H.; Wang, W.H.; Zhang, Y.L.; Wang, Z.H.; Bi, J.H. Late Jurassic rhyolites from the Wuchagou region in the central Great Xing’an Range, NE China: Petrogenesis and tectonic implications. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2018, 158, 381–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. He, X.L.; Yu, Q.Y.; Liu, S.Y.; Yang, M.J.; Zhang, D. Origin of the Erdaohe Ag–Pb–Zn deposit, central Great Xing’an Range, northeast China: Constraints from fluid inclusions, zircon U-Pb geochronology, and stable isotopes. Ore Geol. Rev. 2021, 137, 104309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Wu, Y.D.; Yang, J.H.; Sun, J.F.; Wang, H.; Zhou, B.Q.; Xu, L.; Wu, B. Revisiting the Late Jurassic adakitic rocks in the Yanshan fold and thrust belts, North China Craton. Partial melts from thickened continental crust? Lithos 2022, 430–431, 106885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Gao, R.Q.; Cai, X.Y. Formation Conditions and Distribution Law of Oil and Gas Fields in the Songliao Basin; Petroleum Industry Press: Beijing, China, 1997; pp. 12–24. [Google Scholar]
  42. Jahn, B.M.; Wu, F.; Chen, B. Granitoids of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt and Continental Growth in the Phanerozoic; Special Papers; Geological Society America: Boulder, CO, USA, 2000; Volume 350, pp. 181–193. [Google Scholar]
  43. Li, S.Q.; Chen, F.; Siebel, W.; Wu, J.D.; Zhu, X.Y. Late Mezosoic tectonic evolution of the Songliao basin, NE China: Evidence from detrital zircon ages and Sr-Nd isotopes. Gondwana Res. 2012, 22, 943–955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Zhou, J.B.; Wilde, S.A.; Zhang, X.Z.; Liu, F.L.; Liu, J.H. Detrital zircons from Phanerozoic rocks of the Songliao Block, NE China: Evidence and tectonic implication. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2012, 47, 21–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ren, J.; Tamaki, K.; Li, S.; Zhang, J. Late Mesozoic and Cenozoic rifting and its dynamic setting in Eastern China and adjacent areas. Tectonophysics 2002, 344, 175–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Wang, P.; Liu, W.; Wang, S.; Song, W. 40Ar/39Ar and K/Ar dating on the volcanic rocks in the Songliao basin, NE China: Constraints on stratigraphy and basin dynamics. Int. J. Earth Sci. 2002, 9, 331–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Dong, T.; He, S.; Wang, D.; Hou, Y. Hydrocarbon migration and accumulation in the Upper Cretaceous Qingshankou Formation, Changling Sag, Southern Songliao Basin: Insights from integrated analyses of fluid inclusion, oil source correlation and basin modelling. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2014, 90, 77–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Cai, C.F.; Li, H.T.; Li, K.K.; Jiang, L. Anaerobic oxidation of petroleum coupled with reduction of uranium mineralization: Cases from Dongsheng and Qianjiadian uranium deposits. Pet. Geol. Exp. 2008, 30, 518–521. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  49. Scott, R.W. Late Cretaceous chronostratigraphy (Turonian-Maastrichtian): SK1 core Songliao Basin, China. Geosci. Front. 2012, 3, 357–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zhao, B.; Wang, C.; Wang, X.; Feng, Z.Q. Late Cretaceous (Campanian) provenance change in the Songliao Basin, NE China: Evidence from detrital zircon U-Pb ages from the Yaojia and Nenjiang Formations. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeocl. 2013, 385, 83–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Dickinson, W.R.; Suczek, C.A. Plate tectonics and sandstone compositions. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull. 1979, 63, 2164–2182. [Google Scholar]
  52. Chen, F.; Hegner, E.; Todt, W. Zircon ages and Nd isotopic and chemical compositions of orthogneisses from the Black Forest, Germany: Evidence for a Cambrian magmatic arc. Int. J. Earth Sci. 2000, 88, 791–802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Zhou, J.X. Quantitative Analysis of Silicate Minerals by Electron Probe Method; Standards Press of China: Beijing, China, 2002; pp. 1–8. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  54. Nesbitt, H.W.; Young, G.M. Early proterozoic climates and plate motions inferred from major element chemistry of lutites. Nature 1982, 299, 715–717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Harnois, L. The CIW index: A new chemical index of weathering. Sediment. Geol. 1988, 55, 319–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Cox, R.; Lowe, D.R.; Cullers, R.L. The influence of sediment recycling and basement composition on evolution of mudrock chemistry in the south-western United States. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1995, 59, 2919–2940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Cullers, R.L.; Podkovyron, V.N. Geochemistry of the Mesoproterozoic Lakhanda shales in southeastern Yakutia, Russia: Implication for mineralogical and provenance control, and recycling. Precambrian Res. 2000, 104, 77–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Sun, S.S.; McDonough, W.F. Chemical and isotopic systematics of oceanic basalts: Implications for mantle composition and processes. In Magmatism in the Ocean Basalts: Implications of Mantle Composition and Processes; Special Publications; Saunders, A.D., Norry, M.J., Eds.; Geological Society: London, UK, 1989; Volume 42, pp. 313–345. [Google Scholar]
  59. Haskin, L.A.; Paster, T.P. Geochemistry and mineralogy of the rare earths. In Handbook on the Physics and Chemistry of Rare Earths; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1979; Volume 3, pp. 1–80. [Google Scholar]
  60. Yi, C.; Han, X.Z.; Li, X.D.; Zhang, K.; Chen, X.L. Study on sandstone petrologic feature of the Zhiluo Formation and its controls on uranium mineralization in Northeastern Ordos Basin. Geol. J. China Univ. 2014, 20, 185–197. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  61. Miao, A.S.; Lu, Q.; Liu, H.F.; Xiao, P. Occurrence and formation of coffinite in ancient interlayer oxidizing zone of sandstone type U-deposit in Ordos Basin. Bull. Geol. Sci. Tech. 2009, 28, 51–58. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  62. Wang, Y.Y.; Wu, P. Geochemical criteria of sediments in the coastal area of Jiangsu and Zhejiang Provinces. J. Tongji Univ. 1983, 4, 82–90. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  63. Liu, G.; Zhou, D.S. Application of microelements analysis in identifying sedimentary environment: Taking Qianjiang Formation in the Jianghan basin as an example. Pet. Geol. Exp. 2007, 29, 307–310. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  64. Tian, S.H.; Yang, Z.S.; Hou, Z.Q.; Liu, Y.C.; Gao, Y.G.; Wang, Z.L.; Song, Y.C.; Xue, W.E.; Lu, H.F.; Wang, F.C.; et al. Geological Characteristics and Prospecting Potential of No.1 Vein in Linglong Fault Belt, Shandong Province. Miner. Depos. 2009, 28, 747–758. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  65. Ma, H.H.; Liu, C.Y.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, D.D.; Wang, W.Q.; Zhao, Y.; Gao, M.; Quan, X.Y. Geochemical characteristics and depositional environment implications of sedimentary rocks in the Chang 7 member of Yanchang Formation in the Ordos Basin. Geoscience 2019, 33, 872–882. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  66. Rimmer, S.M.; Thompson, J.A.; Goodnight, S.A.; Robl, T.L. Multiple controls on the preservation of organic matter in Devonian-Mississippian marine black shales: Geochemical and petrographic evidence. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 2004, 215, 125–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Pattan, J.N.; Pearce, N.J.G.; Mislankar, P.G. Constrains in using cerium-anomaly of bulk sediments as an indicator of paleo bottom water redox environment: A case study from the Central Indian Ocean Basin. Chem. Geol. 2005, 221, 260–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Hatch, J.R.; Levecthal, J.S. Rekationship between inferred redox potential of the depositional environment and geochemistary of the upper pennsylvanian (Missourian) stark shale member of the dennis limestone. Wabanusee Country Kansas, U.S.A. Chem. Geol. 1992, 99, 65–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Piper, D.Z. Seawater as the source of minor elements in black shales, phosphorites and other sedimentary rocks. Chem. Geol. 1994, 117, 95–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Jones, B.; Manning, D.A.C. Comparison of geochemical indices used for the interpretation of palaeoredox conditions in ancient mudstones. Chem. Geol. 1994, 111, 111–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Hallberg, R.O. A geochemical method for investigation of paleoredox conditions in sediments. Ambio Spec. Rep. 1976, 4, 139–147. [Google Scholar]
  72. Gaillardet, J.; Dupre, B.; Allegre, C.J. Geochemistry of large river suspended sediments: Silicate weathering or recycling tracer? Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1999, 63, 4037–4051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Johnsson, M.J.; Basu, A.C. Processes Controlling the Composition of Clastic Sediments; Special Paper; Geological Society of America: Boulder, CO, USA, 1993; Volume 284, pp. 1–19. [Google Scholar]
  74. Lambeck, A.; Huston, D.; Maidment, D.; Southgate, P. Sedimentary geochemistry, geochronology and sequence stratigraphy as tools to typecast stratigraphic units and constrain evolution in the gold mineralised Palaeoproterozoic Tanami Region, Northern Australia. Precambrian Res. 2008, 166, 185–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Mclennan, S.M.; Hemming, S.; Mcdaniel, D.K.; Hanson, G.N. Geochemical Approaches to Sedimentation, Provenance and Tectonics; Special Paper; Geological Society of America: Boulder, CO, USA, 1993; Volume 284, pp. 21–40. [Google Scholar]
  76. Garcia, D.; Fonteilles, M.; Moutte, J. Sedimentary fractionations between Al, Ti, and Zr and the genesis of strongly peraluminous granites. J. Geol. 1994, 102, 411–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Caracciolo, L.; Le Pera, E.; Muto, F.; Perri, F. Sandstone petrology and mudstone geochemistry of the Peruc-Korycany Formation (Bohemian Cretaceous Basin, Czech Republic). Int. Geol. Rev. 2011, 53, 1003–1031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Fedo, C.M.; Wayne Nesbitt, H.; Young, G.M. Unraveling the effects of potassium implications metasomatism in sedimentary rocks and paleosols, with implications for paleoweathering conditions and provenance. Geology 1995, 23, 921–924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Nesbitt, H.W.; Young, G.M. Prediction of some weathering trends of plutonic and volcanic rocks based on thermodynamic and kinetic considerations. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1984, 48, 1523–1534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. McLennan, S.M. Weathering and global denudation. J. Geol. 1993, 101, 295–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Barshad, I. The effect of a variation in precipitation on the nature of clay minerals formation in soils from acid and basic igneous rocks. In Proceedings of the International Clay Conference, Jerusalem, Israel, 20–24 June 1966; Israel Program for Scientific Translations: Jerusalem, Israel, 1966; pp. 167–173. [Google Scholar]
  82. Van de Damp, P.C.; Leake, B.E. Petrography and geochemistry of feldspathic and mafic sediments of the northeastern Pacific margin. Trans. R. Soc. Edinb. Earth Sci. 1985, 76, 411–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Bhatia, M.R.; Crook, K.A.W. Trace element characteristics of graywacks and tectonic discrimination of sedimentary basins. Contrib. Miner. Pet. 1986, 92, 182–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Condie, K.C. Chemical composition and evolution of the upper continental crust: Contrasting results from surface samples and shales. Chem. Geol. 1993, 104, 1–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. McLennan, S.M.; Hemming, S.R.; Taylor, S.R.; Eriksson, K.A. Early Proterozoic crustal evolution: Geochemical and Nd-Pb isotopic evidence from metasedimentary rocks, southwestern North America. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1995, 59, 1153–1177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Hayashi, K.I.; Fujisawa, H.; Holland, H.D.; Ohmoto, H. Geochemistry of ~1.9Ga sedimentary rocks from northeastern Labrador, Canada. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1997, 61, 4115–4137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Condie, K.C.; Wronkiewicz, D.J. The Cr/Th ratio in Precambrian pelites from the Kaapvaal Craton as an index of craton evolution. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1990, 97, 256–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Shao, L.; Stattegger, K. Sandstone petrology and geochemistry of the Turpan Basin (NW China): Implications for the tectonic evolution of a continental basin. J. Sediment. Res. 2001, 71, 37–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Bhatia, M.R. Plate Tectonics and geochemical composition of sandstones. J. Geol. 1983, 91, 611–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Bhatia, M.R. Rare elements geochemical of Australia Paleozoic graywacks and mudrocks: Provenance and tectonic control. Sediment. Geol. 1985, 45, 97–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. MeLennan, S.M. Relationships between the trace element composition of sedimentary rocks and upper continental crust. Geochem. Geophys. Geosystems 2001, 2, 2000GC000109. [Google Scholar]
  92. Li, S.Y.; Li, R.W.; Meng, Q.R.; Wang, D.X. Radiometric dating of sediments derived from metamorphic rocks of the Dabie Orogenic Belt in the Jurassic and Early Cretaceous. Prog. Nat. Sci. 2006, 16, 194–202. [Google Scholar]
  93. Nesbitt, H.W.; MacRae, N.D.; Kronberg, B.I. Amazon deep-sea fan muds: Light REE enriched products of extreme chemical weathering. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1990, 110, 118–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Li, W.P.; Li, X.H.; Lu, F.X. Genesis and geological significance for the middle Jurassic high Sr and low Y type volcanic rocks in Fuxin area of west Liaoning, northeastern China. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2001, 17, 523–532. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  95. Li, W.P.; Li, X.H.; Lu, F.X.; Zhou, Y.Q.; Zhang, D.G. Geological characteristics and its setting for volcanic rocks of early Cretaceous Yixian Formation in western Liaoning province, eastern China. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2002, 18, 193–204. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  96. Yu, Q.; Ge, W.C.; Yang, H.; Xing, D.H.; Zhang, Y.L. Zircon U-b chronology and geochemical characteristics of volcanic rocks from Wudaoling Formation in Zhangguangcai Range. Glob. Geol. 2013, 32, 707–716. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  97. Duan, P.X.; Li, C.M.; Liu, C.; Deng, J.F.; Zhao, G.C. Geochronology and geochemistry of the granites from the Jinchanggouliang gold deposit area in the Inner Mongolia and its geological sigificance. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2014, 30, 3189–3202. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  98. Yang, Y.; Liu, S.R.; Xiao, M.S.; Yang, Y.Z. Geochemical characteristics of the Mesozoic-Cenozoic in Kulunqi area and its geological significance. Mineral. Petrol. 2014, 34, 54–60. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  99. Yang, W.B.; Niu, H.C.; Cheng, L.R.; Shan, Q.; Li, N.B. Geochronology, geochemistry and geodynamic implications of the Late Mesozoic volcanic rocks in the southern Great Xing’an Mountains, NE China. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2015, 113, 454–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Li, P.C.; Li, S.C.; Liu, Z.H.; Li, G.; Bai, X.H.; Wan, L. Formation age and tectonic environment of volcanic rocks from Manketouebo Formation in Linxi area, Inner Mongolia. Glob. Geol. 2016, 35, 77–88. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  101. Li, P.C.; Liu, Z.H.; Li, S.C.; Xu, Z.Y.; Li, G.; Guan, Q.B. Geochronology, Geochemistry, Zircon Hf isotopic characteristics and tectonic setting of Hudugeshaorong pluton in Balinyouqi, Inner Mongolia. Earth Sci. 2016, 41, 1995–2007. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  102. Zou, T.; Wang, Y.W.; Wang, J.B.; Zhang, H.Q.; Zhao, L.T.; Shi, Y.; Liu, Y.Z. Zircon U-Pb chronology and geochemistry of late Carboniferous alkali rich intrusive rocks in the Xiayingfang Area, Eastern Hebei Province, and its geological significance. Acta Geol. Sin. 2017, 91, 2423–2442. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  103. Li, W.W.; Chen, J.S.; Gao, Z.H.; Liu, M.; Li, B.; Yang, F. Geochronology and geochemistry of the early carboniferous granodiorites in Haladaokou area of Chifeng city: Geological implication. Geol. Res. 2020, 29, 213–223. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  104. Zhang, C.; Quan, J.Y.; Zhang, Y.J.; Liu, Z.H.; Li, W.; Wang, Y.; Qian, C.; Zhang, L.; Ge, J.T. Late Mesozoic tectonic evolution of the southern Great Xing’an Range, NE China: Evidence from whole-rock geochemistry, and zircon U-Pb ages and Hf isotopes from volcanic rocks. Lithos 2020, 362–363, 105409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Ji, G.Y.; Jiang, S.H.; Li, G.F.; Yi, J.J.; Zhang, L.L.; Liu, Y.F. Metallogenetic control of magmatism on the Maodeng Su-Cu deposit in the southern Great Xing’an Range: Evidence from geochronology, geochemistry, and Sr-Nd-Pb isotopes. Geotecton. Et Metallog. 2021, 45, 681–704. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  106. Zhang, L.S.; Sun, F.Y.; Li, B.H.; Qian, Y.; Zhang, Y.J.; Wang, L.; Wang, L.L. Petrogenesis and tectonic setting of granitoids in the Fu’anpu molybdenum deposit Lesser Xing’an-Zhangguangcai range metallogenic belt: Constraints from element geochemistry, zircon U-Pb geochronology and Sr-Nd-Hf isotopes. Acta Geol. Sin. 2021, 95. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Zhang, L.S.; Sun, F.Y.; Qian, Y.; Zhang, Y.J.; Wang, L.; Wang, L.L. Petrogenesis of Middle Jurassic granitoids in Houdaomu, Central Jilin Province: Implications for the growth of Proterozoic continental crust in the eastern CAOB. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2021, 37, 2051–2072. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  108. Chen, G.Z.; Wu, G.; Li, Y.L.; Li, T.G.; Liu, R.L.; Li, R.H.; Yang, F. Zircon U-Pb age and geochemistry of the Qianjinchang intrusion in the Southern Great Xing’an Range and its Geological Implications. Geotecton. Et Metallog. 2022, 46, 356–379. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  109. Ji, G.Y.; Jiang, S.H.; Zhang, L.S.; Liu, Y.F.; Zhang, L.L. Chronology and geochemical characteristics of the highly fractionated alkali feldspar granite from the Maodeng deposit in the southern Great Xing’an Range. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2022, 38, 855–882. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  110. Zhang, G.B.; Chen, X.K.; Zhao, Y. Geochronology, Geochemistry and Geological Significance of the Middle Jurassic Porphyritic Monzogranite in the Southern Zhangguangcai Range, Heilongjiang Province. J. Jilin Univ. 2022, 52, 1907–1925. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  111. Li, H.N.; Han, J.; Zhao, Z.H.; Yin, Z.G. Magma-mixing origin for the Early Jurassic intrusive rocks in the eastern Songnen-Zhangguangcai Range Massif, NE China: Evidence from geochronology, geochemistry and Hf-O-Sr-Nd isotopes. Gondwana Res. 2023, 121, 72–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Xiao, W.J.; Zhang, L.C.; Qin, K.Z. Paleozoic accretionary and collisional tectonics of the eastern Tienshan (China): Implications for the continental growth of Central Asia. Am. J. Sci. 2004, 304, 370–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  113. Ouyang, H.G.; Mao, J.W.; Zhou, Z.H.; Su, H.M. Late Mesozoic metallogeny and intracontinental magmatism, southern Great Xing’an Range, northeastern China. Gondwana Res. 2015, 27, 1153–1172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Wang, P.; Chen, Y.J.; Wang, C.M.; Zhu, X.F.; Wang, S.X. Genesis and tectonic setting of the giant Diyanqin’amu porphyry Mo deposit in Great Hingan Range, NE China: Constraints from U-Pb and Re–Os geochronology and Hf isotopic geochemistry. Ore Geol. Rev. 2016, 8, 760–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Xu, W.L.; Wang, F.; Fei, F.P.; Meng, E.; Tang, J.; Xu, M.J.; Wang, W. Mesozoic tectonic regimes and regional ore-forming background in NE China: Constrains from spatial and temporal variation of Mesozoic volcanic rock associations. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2013, 29, 339–353. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  116. Deng, C.Z.; Sun, D.Y.; Li, G.H.; Lu, S.; Tang, Z.Y.; Gou, J.; Yang, Y.J. Early Cretaceous volcanic rocks in the Great Xing’an Range: Late effect of a flat-slab subduction. J. Geodyn. 2019, 124, 38–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Wang, D.; Zhao, G.C.; Su, S.G.; Li, H.X. Spatial-temporal distribution of Late Mesozoic intrusive rocks in south Daxing’anling Mountains and the characteristic contrast of rocks in the mid ridge and the east slope. Geoscience 2020, 34, 466–482. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  118. Chen, G.Z.; Wu, G.; Li, T.G.; Liu, R.L.; Li, R.H.; Li, Y.L.; Yang, F. Mineralization of the Daolundaba Cu-Sn-W-Ag deposit in the southern Great Xing’an Range, China: Constraints from geochronology, geochemistry, and Hf isotope. Ore Geol. Rev. 2021, 133, 104117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Liu, F.; Wang, X.; Hai, L.F.; Zhao, D.S. Zircon U-Pb ages, Hf isotope and extensional tectonics of manzogranite in the Hansumu area of southern Great Khingan. Geol. China 2021, 48, 1609–1622. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  120. Guo, X.G.; Li, J.W.; Li, C.J.; Jiao, T.L. Geochronology, geochemistry, and Sr–Nd–Pb–Hf isotopes of ore-related diorites in the Erdaohe Pb-Zn-Ag deposit, Great Hinggan Range, NE China: Constraints on timing, petrogenesis and tectonic setting. Lithos 2021, 386–387, 106005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. He, P.; Guo, S.; Zhang, T.F.; Zhang, Y.L.; Su, H.; Fu, Q.L. Geochronology, geochemistry and tectonic setting of volcanic rocks from Manketouebo Formation in Wulagai area, southern Great Xing’an Range. Geol. China 2022, 49, 601–619. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  122. Guo, Z.J.; Zhou, Z.H.; Li, G.T.; Li, J.W.; Wu, X.L.; Ouyang, H.G.; Wang, A.S.; Xiang, A.P.; Dong, X.Z. SHRIMP U-Pb zircon dating and petrogeo-chemistral characteristics of the intermediate-acid intrusive rocks in the Aoergai copper deposit of Inner Mongolia. Geol. China 2012, 39, 1486–1500. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  123. Liu, J.; Xi, A.H.; Ge, Y.H.; Tang, X.Y.; Xu, B.W.; Wang, M.Z.; Ma, Y.J. LA-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb ages and petrogenesis of granodiorite in Mengguyingzi, Chifeng, Inner Mongolia. Geol. China 2015, 34, 437–446. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  124. Zhang, H.H.; Zheng, Y.J.; Chen, S.W.; Zhang, J.; Gong, F.H.; Su, F.; Huang, X. Age of Xingfuzhilu Formation and Contact Relation between Permian and Triassic strata in southern Da Hinggan Mountains: Constraints from the tuff zircon U-Pb ages. Geol. Bull. China 2015, 42, 1754–1764. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  125. Du, J.Y.; Tao, N.; Guo, J.C.; Jiang, B.; Du, G.X. Geochronology and Geochemistry of Bayanchagan Pluton in Balinyouqi, Inner Mongolia: Implication for Timing of closure of Paleo-Asian Ocean. Earth Sci. 2019, 44, 3361–3377. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  126. Li, M.X. Geochemical characteristics and petrogenesis of Early Cretaceous monzonitic granite in theMandu area, southern Da Hinggan Mountains. Geol. Bull. China 2020, 39, 224–233. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  127. Zhao, Q. Magmatism and Leas-Zinc Mineralization in the Southern Great Xing’an Range, NE China; China University of Geoscience: Beijing, China, 2020; pp. 56–77. [Google Scholar]
  128. Zhang, L.L.; Jiang, S.H.; Bagas, L.; Kang, H. An ancient continental crustal source for Mo mineralisation in the eastern Central Asian Orogen: A case study of the Bilugangan Mo deposit. Ore Geol. Rev. 2021, 139, 104513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Zhang, D.Q. Two granitoid series in different tectonic environment of Souther Da Hinggan Mountains, China. Acta Petrol. Mineral. 1993, 12, 1–11. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  130. Liu, Y.J.; Zhang, X.Z.; Jin, W.; Chi, X.G.; Wang, C.W.; Ma, Z.H.; Han, G.Q.; Wen, Q.B.; Zhao, Y.L.; Wang, W.D.; et al. Late Paleozoic tectonic evolution in Northeast China. Geol. China 2010, 37, 943–951. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  131. Zang, Y.H.; Li, J.M.; Ning, J. Provenance tracing and tectonic setting of the Upper Cretaceous Yaojia Formation sandstone in the HLJ area, southern Songliao Basin: Constrains from petrogeochemistry and zircon U-Pb chronology. Bull. Geol. Sci. Tect. 2022. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  132. Wang, S.Y.; Cheng, Y.H.; Xu, D.H. Late Cretaceous-Cenozoic tectonic-sedimentary evolution and U-enrichment in the southern Songliao Basin. Ore Geol. Rev. 2020, 126, 103786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Chen, M.Y.; Nie, F.J.; Fayek, M. Discussion of the genetic relationship between pyrite and uranium mineralization in sandstone-type uranium deposit in Kailu Basin. Acta Geosci. Sin. 2021, 42, 868–880. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  134. Huang, G.; Wu, D.; Huang, G.; Xue, W.; Min, Z.; Fan, P. Provenance of Jurassic Sediments from Yuqia Sandstone-Type Uranium Deposits in the Northern Margin of Qaidam Basin, China and Its Implications for Uranium Mineralization. Minerals 2022, 12, 82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Minerals 13 01053 g003
Figure 3. The distribution and location of samples in the drill holes.
Figure 3. The distribution and location of samples in the drill holes.
Minerals 13 01053 g003
Minerals 13 01053 g004
Figure 4. Photomicrographs of the Yaojia Formation sandstones. (a) Sandstone with felsic volcanic lithic fragments, monocrystalline quartz, granite fragments, and calcite (+). (b) Monocrystalline quartz and polycrystalline quartz are metasomatized by calcite (+). (c) Sericitization of plagioclase (+). (d) Quartz fragment and rhyolite fragment (+). (e) Granite fragment (+). (f) Quartz fragment (Qf). (+) = cross-polarized light. Abbreviations: Lfv, felsic volcanic lithic fragment; Qm, monocrystalline quartz; Cal, calcite; Gf, granite fragments; Qp, polycrystalline quartz; Pl, plagioclase; Ser, Sericitization; Qf, quartz fragment; Rf, rhyolite fragment.
Figure 4. Photomicrographs of the Yaojia Formation sandstones. (a) Sandstone with felsic volcanic lithic fragments, monocrystalline quartz, granite fragments, and calcite (+). (b) Monocrystalline quartz and polycrystalline quartz are metasomatized by calcite (+). (c) Sericitization of plagioclase (+). (d) Quartz fragment and rhyolite fragment (+). (e) Granite fragment (+). (f) Quartz fragment (Qf). (+) = cross-polarized light. Abbreviations: Lfv, felsic volcanic lithic fragment; Qm, monocrystalline quartz; Cal, calcite; Gf, granite fragments; Qp, polycrystalline quartz; Pl, plagioclase; Ser, Sericitization; Qf, quartz fragment; Rf, rhyolite fragment.
Minerals 13 01053 g004
Minerals 13 01053 g005
Figure 5. Photomicrographs of the Yaojia Formation sandstones. (a) Calcite metasomatizes quartz (+). (b) Kaolinite developed between the detrital particles in the form of a book leaf (+). (c) Framboidal pyrite (RL). (d) Colloidal pyrite (RL). (e) Bitumen (+). (f) Pyrite occupies the cell cavities of carbonaceous fragments (RL). (+) = cross-polarized light; (RL) = reflected light. Abbreviations: Qm, monocrystalline quartz; Cal, calcite; Kln, kaolinite; Py, pyrite; Bitu, bitumen; Cf, carbonaceous fragments.
Figure 5. Photomicrographs of the Yaojia Formation sandstones. (a) Calcite metasomatizes quartz (+). (b) Kaolinite developed between the detrital particles in the form of a book leaf (+). (c) Framboidal pyrite (RL). (d) Colloidal pyrite (RL). (e) Bitumen (+). (f) Pyrite occupies the cell cavities of carbonaceous fragments (RL). (+) = cross-polarized light; (RL) = reflected light. Abbreviations: Qm, monocrystalline quartz; Cal, calcite; Kln, kaolinite; Py, pyrite; Bitu, bitumen; Cf, carbonaceous fragments.
Minerals 13 01053 g005
Minerals 13 01053 g006
Figure 6. (a) Qt-F-L and (b) Qm-F-Lt discrimination diagrams of the Yaojia Formation in the SW Songliao Basin (after Dickinson and Suczek [51]).
Figure 6. (a) Qt-F-L and (b) Qm-F-Lt discrimination diagrams of the Yaojia Formation in the SW Songliao Basin (after Dickinson and Suczek [51]).
Minerals 13 01053 g006
Minerals 13 01053 g007
Figure 7. Upper continental crustal normalized trace element spider diagram of the Yaojia Formation sandstones.
Figure 7. Upper continental crustal normalized trace element spider diagram of the Yaojia Formation sandstones.
Minerals 13 01053 g007
Minerals 13 01053 g008
Figure 8. Chondrite-normalized REE patterns (a) and NASC-normalized REE patterns (b) of the Yaojia Formation in the SW Songliao Basin. The chondrite normalized data are quoted from Sun and McDonough [58]; the North American shale standardization data are quoted from Haskin and Paster [59].
Figure 8. Chondrite-normalized REE patterns (a) and NASC-normalized REE patterns (b) of the Yaojia Formation in the SW Songliao Basin. The chondrite normalized data are quoted from Sun and McDonough [58]; the North American shale standardization data are quoted from Haskin and Paster [59].
Minerals 13 01053 g008
Minerals 13 01053 g009
Figure 9. BSE images of uranium minerals in the Yaojia Formation sandstones. (a) Uranium is adsorbed by kaolinite; (b) uranium is adsorbed by kaolinite and distributed in the form of veins; (c) coffinite is distributed in stellate forms in the fissures and dissolved pores of k-feldspar; (d) coffinite fills in the dissolved pores of quartz. Abbreviations: Kln, kaolinite; Pit, pitchblende; Cof, coffinite; Kfs, k-feldspar; Qm, quartz.
Figure 9. BSE images of uranium minerals in the Yaojia Formation sandstones. (a) Uranium is adsorbed by kaolinite; (b) uranium is adsorbed by kaolinite and distributed in the form of veins; (c) coffinite is distributed in stellate forms in the fissures and dissolved pores of k-feldspar; (d) coffinite fills in the dissolved pores of quartz. Abbreviations: Kln, kaolinite; Pit, pitchblende; Cof, coffinite; Kfs, k-feldspar; Qm, quartz.
Minerals 13 01053 g009
Minerals 13 01053 g010
Figure 10. Characteristics of uranium minerals and pyrite in the Yaojia Formation sandstones. (a) Pitchblende grows around framboidal and colloidal pyrite. (b) Coffinite distributed in an irregular shape around colloidal pyrite. (c) Pitchblende distributed at the edges of the framboidal pyrite. (d) Pyrite and pitchblende are simultaneously generated in the organic matter cell cavity. Abbreviations: Pit, pitchblende; Py, pyrite; Cof, coffinite; OM, organic matter.
Figure 10. Characteristics of uranium minerals and pyrite in the Yaojia Formation sandstones. (a) Pitchblende grows around framboidal and colloidal pyrite. (b) Coffinite distributed in an irregular shape around colloidal pyrite. (c) Pitchblende distributed at the edges of the framboidal pyrite. (d) Pyrite and pitchblende are simultaneously generated in the organic matter cell cavity. Abbreviations: Pit, pitchblende; Py, pyrite; Cof, coffinite; OM, organic matter.
Minerals 13 01053 g010
Minerals 13 01053 g011
Figure 11. (a) Zr/Sc-Th/Sc diagram [75]; (b) 15Al2O3-Zr-300TiO2 diagram for the Yaojia Formation sandstones [76,77].
Figure 11. (a) Zr/Sc-Th/Sc diagram [75]; (b) 15Al2O3-Zr-300TiO2 diagram for the Yaojia Formation sandstones [76,77].
Minerals 13 01053 g011
Minerals 13 01053 g012
Figure 12. The source discrimination diagrams for the Yaojia Formation sandstones. (a) TiO2-Zr diagram [86]; (b) La/Sc-Co/Th diagram [84]; (C) Th/Sc-Cr/Th diagram [87]; (d) La/Th-La/Yb diagram [88].
Figure 12. The source discrimination diagrams for the Yaojia Formation sandstones. (a) TiO2-Zr diagram [86]; (b) La/Sc-Co/Th diagram [84]; (C) Th/Sc-Cr/Th diagram [87]; (d) La/Th-La/Yb diagram [88].
Minerals 13 01053 g012
Minerals 13 01053 g013
Figure 13. Major element discrimination diagrams of the Yaojia Formation sandstones for tectonic settings [89]. (a) TiO2-(Fe2O3T+MgO) diagram; (b) Al2O3/SiO2-(Fe2O3T+MgO) diagram.
Figure 13. Major element discrimination diagrams of the Yaojia Formation sandstones for tectonic settings [89]. (a) TiO2-(Fe2O3T+MgO) diagram; (b) Al2O3/SiO2-(Fe2O3T+MgO) diagram.
Minerals 13 01053 g013
Minerals 13 01053 g014
Figure 14. Trace element discrimination diagrams of the Yaojia Formation sandstones for tectonic settings [83]. (a) La-Th-Sc diagram; (b) Th-Sc-Zr/10 diagram; (c) Th-Co-Zr/10 diagram.
Figure 14. Trace element discrimination diagrams of the Yaojia Formation sandstones for tectonic settings [83]. (a) La-Th-Sc diagram; (b) Th-Sc-Zr/10 diagram; (c) Th-Co-Zr/10 diagram.
Minerals 13 01053 g014
Minerals 13 01053 g015
Figure 15. Chondrite-normalized REE patterns of igneous rocks distributed in potential provenances.
Figure 15. Chondrite-normalized REE patterns of igneous rocks distributed in potential provenances.
Minerals 13 01053 g015
Table 1. Details of sandstone samples from the Yaojia Formation in the SW Songliao Basin.
Table 1. Details of sandstone samples from the Yaojia Formation in the SW Songliao Basin.
SampleDrill HoleDepthLithology
KL051ZK1-4599.6 mGray-white medium-grained sandstone
KL052ZK1-4599.4 mLight red medium-grained sandstone
KL053ZK1-4599.3 mGray-white medium-grained sandstone
KL054ZK1-4599.1 mGray-white medium-grained sandstone
KL056ZK1-6593.7 mGray-white medium-grained sandstone
KL057ZK1-6593.5 mLight red medium-grained sandstone
KL058ZK1-6593.4 mGray-white medium-grained sandstone
KL059ZK1-6592.5 mGray-white medium-grained sandstone
KL060ZK1-6590.3 mGray-white medium-grained sandstone
KL061ZK1-6576.6 mGray-white medium-grained sandstone
KL062ZK1-6586.9 mLight red medium-grained sandstone
KL063ZK1-6585.6 mLight red medium-grained sandstone
KL066ZK1-5562.3 mLight red medium-grained sandstone
KL067ZK1-5561.9 mGray-white medium-grained sandstone
KL068ZK1-5558.4 mGray-white medium-grained sandstone
KL069ZK1-5546.1 mGray-white medium-grained sandstone
KL070ZK1-5539.7 mGray-white coarse-grained sandstone
KL071ZK1-5526.0 mGray-white medium-grained sandstone
KL072ZK1-5514.9 mLight red fine-grained sandstone
KL073ZK1-5473.3 mLight red medium-grained sandstone
Table 2. Statistics of detrital grains from sandstone samples in the SW Songliao Basin.
Table 2. Statistics of detrital grains from sandstone samples in the SW Songliao Basin.
SampleLithologyQm (%)Qp (%)Qt (%)F (%)L (%)Lt (%)
KL051Gray-white medium-grained sandstone4485293947
KL052Light red medium-grained sandstone34640124854
KL053Gray-white medium-grained sandstone28937105362
KL054Gray-white medium-grained sandstone19625165965
KL056Gray-white medium-grained sandstone2042486872
KL057Light red medium-grained sandstone3574294956
KL058Gray-white medium-grained sandstone2863495763
KL059Gray-white medium-grained sandstone2583385967
KL060Gray-white medium-grained sandstone491261152436
KL061Gray-white medium-grained sandstone41849104149
KL062Light red medium-grained sandstone25732115764
KL063Light red medium-grained sandstone33114494758
KL066Light red medium-grained sandstone28533135459
KL067Gray-white medium-grained sandstone30535125358
KL068Gray-white medium-grained sandstone26430135761
KL069Gray-white medium-grained sandstone41647143945
KL070Gray-white coarse-grained sandstone3333685659
KL071Gray--white medium-grained sandstone35540105055
KL072Light red fine-grained sandstone3043495761
KL073Light red medium grained-sandstone5155683641
Note: Qm = Monocrystalline quartz; Qp = Polycrystalline quartz; Qt = Total quartz; F = Feldspar; L = Lithic clasts; Lt = L + Qp.
Table 3. Data table of major element analysis of the Yaojia Formation sandstones in the SW Songliao Basin (wt%).
Table 3. Data table of major element analysis of the Yaojia Formation sandstones in the SW Songliao Basin (wt%).
SampleSiO2Al2O3Fe2O3TMgOCaONa2OK2OMnOTiO2P2O5LOITotalSiO2+
Al2O3		SiO2/
Al2O3		K2O+
Na2O		K2O/
Na2O		CIACIWICV
KL05177.0210.421.730.671.450.493.310.040.300.084.4899.99 87.447.39 3.80 6.76 66.68 86.530.81
KL05276.8310.461.650.691.480.533.370.040.250.074.6199.98 87.297.35 3.90 6.36 65.97 85.690.82
KL05379.099.771.290.551.210.443.160.030.260.084.0599.93 88.868.10 3.60 7.18 66.72 87.070.77
KL05480.169.980.870.430.880.433.230.030.210.073.6999.98 90.148.03 3.66 7.51 67.00 87.560.69
KL05650.447.144.675.4511.630.742.440.300.180.0716.9099.96 57.587.06 3.18 3.30 58.41 74.523.15
KL05751.247.653.495.3011.610.712.460.210.210.0817.0399.99 58.896.70 3.17 3.46 60.46 76.582.77
KL05851.687.683.305.2011.650.702.390.220.230.0716.8599.97 59.366.73 3.09 3.41 61.09 76.932.70
KL05974.729.781.931.222.460.813.100.090.270.105.4999.97 84.507.64 3.91 3.83 61.89 78.581.11
KL06081.4910.120.780.240.370.543.240.020.380.122.6099.90 91.618.05 3.78 6.00 67.98 88.950.63
KL06170.3712.054.860.240.140.393.190.000.580.496.2098.51 82.425.84 3.58 8.18 71.85 90.490.76
KL06278.1410.711.550.521.050.573.280.020.290.073.7699.96 88.857.30 3.85 5.75 66.40 85.140.76
KL06379.609.791.400.521.090.533.180.030.280.063.4799.95 89.398.13 3.71 6.00 65.38 84.900.80
KL06673.549.733.351.132.470.172.650.100.340.106.4099.98 83.277.56 2.82 15.59 74.03 94.720.92
KL06778.6710.072.860.360.440.162.770.040.350.114.1499.97 88.747.81 2.93 17.31 74.01 94.940.67
KL06874.579.972.291.112.730.142.670.090.330.095.9599.94 84.547.48 2.81 19.07 74.80 95.520.82
KL06975.4711.491.730.801.460.193.090.030.330.115.2899.98 86.966.57 3.28 16.26 74.32 94.840.66
KL07079.889.461.510.621.150.132.810.040.270.094.0399.99 89.348.44 2.94 21.62 73.20 95.740.67
KL07171.9711.202.201.232.580.293.350.030.320.096.6899.94 83.176.43 3.64 11.55 70.91 92.050.85
KL07279.4410.210.740.511.170.553.390.040.240.093.5999.9789.657.78 3.94 6.16 65.08 84.970.74
KL07374.7013.092.590.430.371.003.270.020.560.083.8199.92 87.795.71 4.27 3.27 69.74 85.960.70
Table 4. Data table of trace element analysis of the Yaojia Formation sandstones in the SW Songliao Basin (ppm).
Table 4. Data table of trace element analysis of the Yaojia Formation sandstones in the SW Songliao Basin (ppm).
SampleLiBeScVCrCoNiCuZnGaRbSrYMoCd
KL05145.901.903.7032.2013.603.927.173.8536.8013.20117.00151.0023.700.890.13
KL05246.201.883.6030.0011.804.006.853.4434.0012.70117.00150.0023.300.740.12
KL05346.701.713.3624.5012.103.385.754.2331.6012.70113.00166.0022.400.620.10
KL05444.901.522.9218.9010.502.794.614.9024.0012.20109.00157.0020.400.490.10
KL05619.403.015.0246.209.8610.6016.503.6468.709.5081.20611.0018.100.560.36
KL05718.802.033.4536.6011.5014.4020.403.6285.209.3582.30393.0018.400.490.37
KL05818.401.905.0538.1012.4016.0022.903.7192.509.4781.10340.0020.300.500.42
KL05921.301.345.0143.3012.705.638.235.4449.1011.1094.90173.0021.800.560.14
KL06025.301.863.0135.4016.201.674.106.5547.1012.40111.00302.0021.400.630.11
KL06131.503.173.23123.0023.4037.2042.8012.4041.0019.20108.00392.0046.9021.200.70
KL06233.901.605.0835.0014.603.245.374.3534.8012.90114.00161.0024.300.920.17
KL06335.201.405.3438.3013.505.526.125.0535.7012.20112.00133.0025.000.700.23
KL06628.601.436.73196.0016.307.4010.105.5864.1011.2085.10147.0027.100.820.37
KL06728.401.543.6365.7014.907.817.749.9241.2011.2086.60124.0023.300.540.10
KL06817.801.904.1045.4015.105.1910.407.3851.3011.5080.60136.0022.0054.900.35
KL06924.101.315.0037.1016.904.557.355.3737.6012.8095.90341.0020.101.230.11
KL07014.601.413.4426.2011.903.015.524.0931.5010.5084.80187.0020.600.640.12
KL07124.701.374.5437.5016.004.799.204.0946.5013.40110.00168.0022.500.620.10
KL07229.201.403.0924.2010.802.254.415.3025.0012.80119.00162.0021.300.550.16
KL07335.802.456.4670.0027.502.695.7717.4038.3018.10127.0084.8024.200.980.06
SampleInSbCsBaWTlPbBiThUNbTaZrHf
KL0510.031.405.69524.001.680.7316.600.148.922.2111.900.9298.703.26
KL0520.031.285.71513.001.480.7415.700.098.722.3010.500.8297.403.22
KL0530.031.214.94508.001.430.6917.100.089.132.2911.100.8698.803.24
KL0540.031.124.29487.001.260.6617.400.078.383.109.300.7492.803.00
KL0560.021.773.68532.001.240.4815.600.075.5113.606.870.5571.602.24
KL0570.021.273.90490.001.060.4816.700.055.883.927.510.5873.702.38
KL0580.021.063.96540.001.220.5117.100.066.303.778.500.6475.202.42
KL0590.031.264.80568.001.320.5814.800.107.842.948.970.68103.003.20
KL0600.041.354.41627.001.950.7224.900.1710.70440.0013.701.0392.402.79
KL0610.033.516.453890.002.584.17100.000.2427.5078.9017.101.22114.003.29
KL0620.031.365.77512.001.690.7220.300.119.683.4911.700.92102.003.46
KL0630.031.784.96501.001.600.7119.200.119.633.0812.000.9699.903.27
KL0660.041.324.54384.001.900.5214.200.117.907.1610.900.79110.003.25
KL0670.031.114.40409.001.420.5216.800.118.136.1610.800.81109.003.31
KL0680.032.213.79506.001.660.6316.100.168.46898.0010.200.79109.002.66
KL0690.030.964.09729.001.400.6215.300.086.9522.0010.300.7997.403.04
KL0700.021.123.36496.001.130.5313.100.087.06157.009.140.7297.902.72
KL0710.031.024.57626.001.460.6313.600.128.196.7010.200.80110.003.46
KL0720.031.185.32588.001.360.7416.100.158.156.3610.900.83104.003.50
KL0730.071.7610.00438.003.110.7915.800.3210.706.4017.401.29151.004.81
Table 5. Trace element ratios of the Yaojia Formation sandstones in the SW Songliao Basin.
Table 5. Trace element ratios of the Yaojia Formation sandstones in the SW Songliao Basin.
RatioYaojia FormationMafic ProvenanceFelsic ProvenanceUpper CrustLower Crust
La/Sc7.340.40~1.102.50~16.002.700.30
Th/Sc2.340.04~0.050.83~20.001.000.03
Cr/Th1.6922.00~100.000.50~7.703.30222.00
Co/Th0.827.10~8.300.22~1.500.9033.00
Data SourceIn this paperCullers et al. [57]Taylor and McLennan [6]
Table 6. Data table of rare earth element analysis of the Yaojia Formation sandstones in the SW Songliao Basin (ppm).
Table 6. Data table of rare earth element analysis of the Yaojia Formation sandstones in the SW Songliao Basin (ppm).
SampleLaCePrNdSmEuGdTbDyHoErTmYbLu∑REELREEHREEL/HLaN/YbNLaN/SmNGdN/YbNδEuδCe
KL05129.3052.106.5224.304.290.713.750.693.770.812.400.442.610.36132.05117.2214.837.907.584.301.160.530.87
KL05230.8053.406.5825.204.480.743.840.693.990.842.430.412.670.39136.46121.2015.267.947.794.331.160.530.86
KL05331.7058.407.0327.304.760.774.180.723.890.802.240.382.550.36145.08129.9615.128.608.394.191.320.520.90
KL05431.1057.006.6826.404.700.784.040.693.640.722.070.372.330.33140.85126.6614.198.939.014.171.400.530.91
KL05621.9041.304.7618.603.240.612.860.512.950.601.820.312.050.28101.7990.4111.387.947.214.261.130.600.93
KL05720.5035.604.3216.302.990.562.700.503.040.651.880.332.000.2891.6580.2711.387.056.924.321.090.590.87
KL05820.9036.804.4317.603.190.602.890.523.140.692.090.342.130.2995.6183.5212.096.916.624.121.100.590.88
KL05927.0047.006.0223.404.230.793.570.643.640.762.200.372.490.35122.46108.4414.027.737.324.021.160.620.85
KL06035.9067.308.2231.505.670.934.960.864.530.862.420.402.530.34166.42149.5216.908.859.583.991.580.520.91
KL06139.7081.8010.6042.707.881.996.291.045.941.384.020.633.550.46207.98184.6723.317.927.553.171.430.840.94
KL06232.3059.307.2027.004.910.824.420.794.200.892.510.432.710.39147.87131.5316.348.058.044.141.320.530.90
KL06331.0056.706.8225.805.000.834.240.754.350.892.540.462.690.38142.45126.1516.307.747.783.901.270.540.90
KL06628.6050.806.4424.304.550.774.180.774.280.932.660.482.890.40132.05115.4616.596.966.683.961.170.530.87
KL06728.9053.106.4025.404.610.744.000.724.010.782.370.392.620.36134.40119.1515.257.817.453.951.230.520.90
KL06827.9051.406.3924.904.280.773.910.723.950.832.340.402.570.35130.71115.6415.077.677.334.101.230.570.89
KL06926.0045.505.3821.403.760.773.320.593.280.711.980.352.360.32115.72102.8112.917.967.444.351.140.650.88
KL07026.3045.705.7122.103.960.693.370.603.500.752.120.382.340.32117.84104.4613.387.817.594.181.160.560.86
KL07128.8050.506.2523.904.310.833.640.673.680.792.280.382.430.36128.82114.5914.238.058.004.211.210.620.87
KL07233.5060.907.0526.504.940.844.620.723.840.772.160.412.530.36149.14133.7315.418.678.944.271.480.530.91
KL07331.7058.606.7726.404.570.704.010.724.170.892.670.463.070.43145.16128.7416.427.846.974.371.060.490.92
Table 7. Electronic probe analysis results of uranium minerals in the SW Songliao Basin (%).
Table 7. Electronic probe analysis results of uranium minerals in the SW Songliao Basin (%).
SitesMgOAl2O3SiO2TiO2UO2ZrO2CaOY2O3PbOMnOFeONa2OBeOP2O5TotalType
079-200.883.080.6280.561.222.430.0500.290.610.900.160.8191.61pitchblende
086-30.010.113.121.7175.152.623.840.2400.021.440.5801.3090.14pitchblende
05A-10.050.660.990.9581.601.140.960.060.030.123.070.832.600.4893.54pitchblende
05A-20.110.751.152.3679.781.271.120.0900.132.890.750.880.5291.80pitchblende
05A-60.060.454.812.7475.881.080.890.010.050.072.800.5000.5889.92pitchblende
74B-2901.533.701.4774.030.782.970.110.190.074.430.3302.2891.89pitchblende
74A-140.243.263.433.9071.341.023.720.090.020.140.820.6801.4290.08pitchblende
24B-40.392.174.323.1774.091.231.471.350.0100.191.130.571.8591.94pitchblende
005-50.030.4411.660.2269.311.663.060.560.0501.780.0100.5789.35coffinite
024-40.221.2715.061.0665.020.410.630.030.040.072.520.321.190.1888.02coffinite
074-80.144.3115.752.4759.361.553.100.0400.131.860.201.240.5790.72coffinite
074-200.060.3118.931.4060.560.752.550.080.070.102.250.6401.5389.23coffinite
Table 8. Trace element ratios of the Yaojia Formation sandstone samples in the SW Songliao Basin.
Table 8. Trace element ratios of the Yaojia Formation sandstone samples in the SW Songliao Basin.
SampleSr/BaV/(V+Ni)V/CrNi/Co(Cu+Mo)/Zn
KL0510.29 0.82 2.37 1.83 0.13
KL0520.29 0.81 2.54 1.71 0.12
KL0530.33 0.81 2.02 1.70 0.15
KL0540.32 0.80 1.80 1.65 0.22
KL0561.15 0.74 4.69 1.56 0.06
KL0570.80 0.64 3.18 1.42 0.05
KL0580.63 0.62 3.07 1.43 0.05
KL0590.30 0.84 3.41 1.46 0.12
KL0600.48 0.90 2.19 2.46 0.15
KL0610.10 0.74 5.26 1.15 0.82
KL0620.31 0.87 2.40 1.66 0.15
KL0630.27 0.86 2.84 1.11 0.16
KL0660.38 0.95 12.02 1.36 0.10
KL0670.30 0.89 4.41 0.99 0.25
KL0680.27 0.81 3.01 2.00 1.21
KL0690.47 0.83 2.20 1.62 0.18
KL0700.38 0.83 2.20 1.83 0.15
KL0710.27 0.80 2.34 1.92 0.10
KL0720.28 0.85 2.24 1.96 0.23
KL0730.19 0.92 2.55 2.14 0.48
Table 9. Comparison of chemical compositions between the Yaojia Formation sandstones in the SW Songliao Basin and the sandstones from various tectonic settings (ppm).
Table 9. Comparison of chemical compositions between the Yaojia Formation sandstones in the SW Songliao Basin and the sandstones from various tectonic settings (ppm).
Research RegionOACAACMPM
∑REE134.2358 ± 10146 ± 20186210
LREE/HREE7.923.8 ± 0.97.7 ± 1.79.108.50
La/Yb11.424.2 ± 1.511 ± 3.612.515.9
(La/Yb)N7.712.8 ± 0.97.5 ± 2.59.108.50
δEu0.571.04 ± 0.110.79 ± 0.130.600.56
Th9.192.27 ± 0.71.11 ± 1.118.8 ± 316.7 ± 3
U83.471.09 ± 0.212.53 ± 0.243.9 ± 0.53.2 ± 0.8
Zr100.3996 ± 20229 ± 27179 ± 33298 ± 80
Nb10.952.0 ± 0.48.5 ± 0.810.7 ± 1.47.9 ± 1.9
Y23.3619.5 ± 5.624.2 ± 2.224.9 ± 3.627.3 ± 5.3
Nd25.0511.36 ± 2.920.8 ± 1.625.4 ± 3.429.0 ± 5.03
V50.18131 ± 4089 ± 13.748 ± 5.931 ± 9.9
Cr14.5837 ± 1351 ± 6.526 ± 4.939 ± 8.5
Ni10.5611 ± 5.113 ± 210 ± 2.58 ± 4.4
Rb/Sr0.590.05 ± 0.050.65 ± 0.330.89 ± 0.241.19 ± 0.4
Ba/Rb6.8321.3 ± 5.07.5 ± 1.34.5 ± 0.84.7 ± 1.1
Ba/Sr3.300.95 ± 0.63.55 ± 1.43.8 ± 0.74.7 ± 1.3
Th/U1.702.1 ± 0.784.6 ± 0.454.8 ± 0.385.6 ± 0.67
Zr/Th11.8448.0 ± 13.421.5 ± 2.49.5 ± 0.719.1 ± 5.8
Zr/Y4.405.67 ± 1.949.6 ± 0.87.2 ± 0.412.4 ± 4.0
Nb/Y0.470.11 ± 0.030.36 ± 0.040.43 ± 0.040.30 ± 0.06
Data SourceIn this paperBhatia (1985) [90]; Bhatia and Crook (1986) [83]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chen, M.; Nie, F.; Xia, F.; Yan, Z.; Yang, D. Provenance, Sedimentary Environment, Tectonic Setting, and Uranium Mineralization Implications of the Yaojia Formation, SW Songliao Basin, NE China. Minerals 2023, 13, 1053. https://doi.org/10.3390/min13081053

AMA Style

Chen M, Nie F, Xia F, Yan Z, Yang D. Provenance, Sedimentary Environment, Tectonic Setting, and Uranium Mineralization Implications of the Yaojia Formation, SW Songliao Basin, NE China. Minerals. 2023; 13(8):1053. https://doi.org/10.3390/min13081053

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chen, Mengya, Fengjun Nie, Fei Xia, Zhaobin Yan, and Dongguang Yang. 2023. "Provenance, Sedimentary Environment, Tectonic Setting, and Uranium Mineralization Implications of the Yaojia Formation, SW Songliao Basin, NE China" Minerals 13, no. 8: 1053. https://doi.org/10.3390/min13081053

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