Next Article in Journal
Utilizing Magnesium Carbonate Induced by CO2 to Modify the Performance of Plastic Clay
Previous Article in Journal
Investigating the Influence of Medium Size and Ratio on Grinding Characteristics
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Minerals
Volume 14
Issue 9
10.3390/min14090874
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

Petrogenesis and Geodynamic Mechanisms of Porphyry Copper Deposits in a Collisional Setting: A Case from an Oligocene Porphyry Cu (Au) Deposit in Western Yangtze Craton, SW China

by
Mimi Yang
1,2,
Xingyuan Li
3,*,
Guoxiang Chi
2,
Hao Song
4,
Zhengqi Xu
4 and
Fufeng Zhao
4
1
College of Resources and Environmental Engineering, Mianyang Normal University, Mianyang 621000, China
2
Department of Geology, University of Regina, Regina, SK S4S 0A2, Canada
3
College of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China
4
College of Earth Science, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Minerals 2024, 14(9), 874; https://doi.org/10.3390/min14090874
Submission received: 6 August 2024 / Revised: 23 August 2024 / Accepted: 25 August 2024 / Published: 27 August 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Mineral Deposits)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The Xifanping deposit is a distinct Cenozoic porphyry Cu (Au) deposit located in the Sanjing porphyry metallogenic belt 100–150 km east of the JinshajFiang fault in the western Yangtze craton. We present new zircon U–Pb–Lu–Hf isotopic studies and geochemical data of the ore-bearing quartz monzonite porphyry from the Xifanping deposit to determine their petrogenesis and geodynamic mechanisms. LA–ICP–MS zircon U–Pb dating yielded precise emplacement ages of 31.87 ± 0.41 Ma (MSWD = 0.86) and 32.24 ± 0.61 Ma (MSWD = 1.8) for quartz monzonite porphyry intrusions, and 254.9 ± 5.1 Ma (MSWD = 1.7) for inherited zircons of the monzonite porphyry. The ore-bearing monzonite porphyry is characterized by high-K calc–alkaline to shoshonite and peraluminous series, relatively enriched in light over heavy REEs, with no distinct Eu anomalies, as well as enrichment in LILEs and depletion of HFSEs, with adakitic affinities. The zircon Lu–Hf isotope data ranged from εHf(t) values of −2.94 to +3.68 (average −0.47) with crustal model (TDM2) ages ranging from 0.88 to 1.30 Ga, whereas the inherited zircons displayed positive εHf(t) values ranging from +1.83 to +7.98 (average +5.82), with crustal model (TDM2) ages ranging from 0.77 to 1.17 Ga. Results suggest that the Xifanping porphyry Cu (Au) deposit is related to two periods of magmatic activities. Early magmas were generated from the Paleo-Tethys oceanic subduction during the Late Permian. The subsequent porphyry magma was likely formed by the remelting of previously subduction-modified arc lithosphere, triggered by the continental collision between the Indian and Asian plates in the Cenozoic. The deep magmas and late hydrothermal fluids took advantage of the early magma transport channels along tectonically weak zones during the transition from an extrusive to an extensional–tensional tectonic environment. Early dikes from remelted and assimilated crust contributed to the two age ranges observed in the porphyry intrusions from the Xifanping deposit. The juvenile lower crust materials of the early magmatic arc were potential sources of the Cenozoic porphyry magmas, which has significant implications for mineral exploration and the geological understanding of porphyry Cu deposits in this region.

1. Introduction

Porphyry copper deposits (PCDs) are an important source of copper (Cu), gold (Au), and molybdenum (Mo) [1,2]. In an arc setting, adakites have been closely associated with PCDs [3]. According to recent studies, however, porphyry Cu systems are also associated with collision and post-subduction settings [4]. These collision-type porphyry deposits include, for example, deposits in the Gangdese tectonic belt of the Qinghai–Tibetan Plateau of porphyry Cu–Mo [5,6,7,8], deposits in the Jinshajiang–Red River tectonic belt (JSRR) of porphyry Cu–(Mo–Au) [9,10,11], and deposits in the Urumieh–Dokhtar belt in central Iran of Eocene–Miocene porphyry Cu [12,13]. Nevertheless, the sources and magma evolution processes of collision-type porphyry deposits remain subjects of debate. Recently proposed hypotheses have suggested that porphyry magmas formed in post-collisional settings. These include (1) a metasomatized lithospheric mantle that experienced partial melting [14,15,16], (2) mantle-derived mafic magmas with low- or high-pressure assimilation-fractional crystallization [17,18,19], (3) thickened or renascent lower crust that has remelted [20,21], and (4) mixed crust–mantle sources [9,21,22].
The eastern Indo–Asian collision zone is home to the Sanjiang Tethyan orogen (Figure 1) [23,24,25]. This region is responsible for most of the production of China’s metal resources. In the western Yangtze Craton, the JSRR tectonic belt has controlled the localization of porphyry Cu–Mo–Au deposits and Cenozoic magmatism (Figure 1b) [11,21,25,26]. Previous work on this porphyry metallogenic belt mainly focused on both sides of the JSRR faults, whereas the Xifanping deposit is a distinct Cenozoic porphyry Cu (Au) deposit located in the central part of the JSRR but 100–150 km east of the Jinshajiang fault. Because of frequent geological disasters (e.g., earthquakes and landslides) and poor transportation conditions in this region, basic geological research has been limited. The geneses, ages, and geodynamic mechanisms of Xifanping porphyry magmas remain poorly understood. To clarify the relationship between porphyry mineralization and magma evolution in the Sanjiang Tethyan orogen, we selected the Xifanping Cu (Au) deposit in the western Yangtze craton as a research example. Meanwhile, through a comparative study of the Cenozoic PCDs in the JSRR tectonic belt, we explored the evolution and migration pattern of post-collisional magmas from west to east in the southeastern Tibetan Plateau. This is to clarify the geodynamic processes that generate ore-bearing porphyries in post-collisional settings.
In this paper, we present new LA–ICP–MS zircon U–Pb dating, Lu–Hf isotopic, and whole-rock geochemical data for ore-bearing monzonite porphyry intrusions at the Xifanping deposit. We also compared previous research data obtained from this area. The major goals of this study are to (i) constrain the precise timing of magmatism, (ii) establish the sources and petrogenesis of ore-bearing monzonite porphyry intrusive rocks, and (iii) better understand the associated geodynamic processes at Xifanping deposit in a post-collisional setting.

2. Geological Background

2.1. Regional Geology

The central part of the JSRR tectonic belt includes the Xifanping Cu (Au) deposit. This significant metallogenic belt in southwest China is located in the Sanjiang Tethyan orogen (Figure 1b) [24,25]. Across the western Yangtze craton and the Qiangtang terrane, the eastern Indo–Asian collision zone encompasses the JSRR tectonic belt [23,24,25]. The Qiangtang, Songpan–Ganze, and Lhasa terranes, as well as Yangtze blocks, were welded together to make this collision zone before the Cretaceous, forming the Eurasian continent (Figure 1a) [27,29].
A crystalline Archean basement in the Yangtze craton was reworked during the breakup of the Columbia supercontinent in the Paleoproterozoic [30]. Neoproterozoic subduction (1000–740 Ma) modified the lithosphere of the western Yangtze craton [31], creating volcanic rocks and plutons along the Panxi–Hannan arc [32,33,34] and a thickened lower crust [20,21]. The Paleo-Tethys Ocean experienced northward subduction during the Permian to the Triassic period (264–225 Ma) [35]. After the Paleo-Tethyan oceanic basins closed in the Late Triassic the western part of the craton was in an intracontinental setting [36,37].
A collision between the Asian and Indian plates at around 55 Ma in the Cenozoic formed the Tibetan plateau and the Himalayan orogenic belt [23,28]. This collision also caused an intensive eastward tectonic extrusion to form in the region surrounding the Tibetan plateau. This event resulted in a strike–slip motion along several faults, including the Batang–Lijiang, Gaoligong, JSRR, and Jiali faults [28]. The convective removal of the lower continental mantle lithosphere during the Eocene–Oligocene (40–30 Ma) was caused by the continuous collision of the Asian and Indian plates. As a result, a potassic igneous belt measuring 1000 km long formed along the Yangtze craton’s western margin (Figure 1b) [21,38].
In the western Yangtze craton, small stocks measuring from 0.8 to 3 km2 in outcrop appear in the form of potassic igneous rocks, which are composed of mafic to felsic lithologies. Many of these lithologies correspond temporally and spatially to porphyry Cu–Mo–Au mineralization. Lamprophyre dikes with minor mafic volcanic rocks account for most of the mafic rocks [37]. Monzogranite porphyries, quartz monzonite, granite, and minor syenite make up the felsic intrusions and are characterized by geochemical affinities of adakitic [21]. A potassic igneous belt along the Yangtze craton’s margin features numerous Cenozoic magmatic-hydrothermal deposits (Figure 1b). The porphyry Cu–(Mo–Au) deposits feature an ore field of Beiya Cu–Au and deposits of Yulong Cu, Binchuan Cu, Machangqing Cu–Mo–Au, Habo Cu–Au, and Tongchang Cu–Mo [25].

2.2. Deposit Geology

Located in Yanyuan County in Sichuan Province, the Xifanping is located along the southwest margin of the Yangtze platform and is part of the Sanjiang Tethyan orogen belt. The Xifanping deposit is located 100–150 km east of the Jinshajiang fault (Figure 1b).
The mining area is underlain by clastic rock series of the Upper Permian Leping Formation and Lower Triassic Qingtianbao Formation. Hundreds of porphyry intrusions have been found in this area (Figure 2a) in the form of dikes, with the size of the porphyry bodies generally less than 0.5 km2. Quartz monzonite porphyry and minor vein-like quartz syenite porphyry, lamprophyre dikes, and dioritic porphyrite account for most of the types of rock [39]. Biotite quartz monzonite porphyry comprises the main ore-forming rocks, intruding a Permo–Triassic clastic sequence with hornization alteration. The Cu (Au) ore bodies are mainly situated within or outside of the contact zone between the mineralized porphyry bodies and wall rock (Figure 2b).
Alteration of the porphyry bodies at the Xifanping deposit is intense and pervasive. In the plane view, alteration zones from the center of the porphyry bodies to the wall rock consist of a deep K-silicate zone, shallow propylitic zone, and hornfels zone. A weak but pervasive propylitic alteration appears as a wide halo in the wall rock (Figure 2b), which features alkalization, carbonatization, and silicification. This trend can also be roughly shown in the vertical section, with characteristics of typical porphyry Cu deposit alteration zones. Along the Upper Permian Leping and Lower Triassic Qingtianbao Formations, veins of ore bodies and the dissemination of veinlets in the quartz monzonite porphyry correspond with hornfels and contact skarns in the meta-sedimentary rocks. The most significant type of mineralization features both skarn and porphyry associations.
Porphyry Cu–Au mineralization in the Xifanping deposit grades up to 0.18 Mt Cu (0.28% Cu; 0.31 ppm Au) [41]. A multistage biotite quartz monzonite porphyry was the source of this mineralization, which crosscuts a Permian–Triassic clastic sequence. Veinlet-disseminated pyrite–chalcopyrite–magnetite–native gold ± molybdenite ± galena ± sphalerite dominate the Cu–Mo ore bodies. These are found within the porphyry intrusions and are also located near the contact between clastic wall rocks and intrusions. Early in the mineralization process, molybdenite formed in the quartz vein and stockwork ores, which correspond to K-silicate alteration assemblages. In contrast, in the late stage, minor molybdenite is found in the veinlets and disseminated ores, which correspond to propylitic alteration assemblages dominated by calcite and chlorite. The K-silicate alteration halo features Au mineralization, of which 15% is magnetite.
At the Xifanping deposit, the emplacement age ranges of porphyry intrusions previously reported mainly include potash feldspar and biotite K–Ar ages of monzonite porphyry: 51.9 Ma [42] and 34.6 Ma [40]; the hornblende 40Ar–39Ar age of Cu-bearing quartz veins: 47.52 Ma and 51.9 Ma [43]; and the zircon U–Pb age of quartz monzonite porphyry: 35.6 ± 0.2 Ma [44] and 100.8 ± 0. 7 Ma [45]. However, the age ranges were distinctly too great to determine the precise timing of magmatism at the Xifanping deposit.

3. Sampling and Analytical Methods

3.1. Sampling

We collected samples from surface and underground outcrops that were representative of the ore-bearing biotite quartz monzonite porphyry from the Xifanping deposit. The sample locations of the ore-bearing porphyry used for zircon LA–ICP–MS, U–Pb dating, and Lu–Hf isotope analyses are shown in Figure 2b. After petrographic examination, 11 fresh samples of biotite quartz monzonite porphyry were selected for geochemical analyses.

3.2. Analytical Methods

Zircon was separated using conventional techniques and handpicked under a binocular microscope. Grains were mounted in epoxy resin along with Penglai, Plešovice, and Qinghu standards [46]. The grains were then polished to half-thickness to reveal the core of the zircons. All zircons were observed under transmitted/reflected light microscopy and cathodoluminescence (CL) imaging, which were used to select spots for the subsequent U–Pb dating.
The laboratory of Wuhan Sample Solution Analytical Technology Co., Ltd. (Wuhan, China) conducted LA–ICP–MS analyses using an Agilent 7500a inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP–MS) (Santa Clara, CA, USA) with a 193 nm wavelength laser. The laser energy was 80 mJ, and the laser frequency was 10 Hz. The laser-off background acquisition took 20–30 s, and the laser-on sample data acquisition took 50 s. Calibration of Pb/U ratios was relative to the zircon reference material Plesovice (206Pb/238U age = 337 Ma [47]), and U and Th concentrations were calibrated against the zircon reference material 91500 (Th = 29 ppm and U = 81 ppm [48]). An in-house zircon reference material, Qinghu, was analyzed as an unknown together with other unknown zircons. Eight measurements on the Qinghu zircon yielded a concordia age of 159.9 ± 1.7 Ma, which was within the error of the recommended value of 159.5 ± 0.2 Ma [49]. For the weighted average calculation, we used ISOPLOT 3.0 and created concordia diagrams.
Wuhan Sample Solution Analytical Technology Co., Ltd. (Wuhan, China) performed LA–MC–ICP–MS to analyze the in situ Hf isotope ratio of zircon. A Geolas 2005 excimer ArF LA system (Lambda Physik, Göttingen, Germany) and a Neptune Plus MC-ICP-MS (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Bremen, Germany) were used for the experiments. All data in this study were acquired on zircon in single-spot ablation mode at a spot size of 44 μm. Each measurement had background signal acquisition for 20 s and ablation signal acquisition at 50 s. We used the analytical methods by [50] and followed the same operating conditions for the MC–ICP–MS instrument and LA system.
The Analysis and Testing Research Center of the Beijing Institute of Geology for Nuclear Industry measured the content of the whole-rock elements. The rock samples were first crushed and milled to 200 mesh. Major element contents were measured with a Philips PW 2404 X-ray fluorescence spectrometer from Amsterdam, The Netherlands, using a rhodium X-ray source. We followed the methods by [51] and achieved analytical precision of more than 1%. Savillex Teflon beakers with HF + HNO3 + HClO4 acid (inside high-pressure bombs) were used to digest the 25 mg samples of the milled molybdenite, auriferous sulfide, and pyrite samples for the bulk-mineral trace element analyses. An Element-I plasma mass spectrometer (Finnigan-MAT Ltd., Bremen, Germany) was used to measure rare earth elements (REEs) and other trace elements. We followed the procedures of [51] for the analysis. The GSR–3 and GSR–15 standards were used for quality control. The analytical precision was better than 5%.

4. Results

4.1. Petrography

The majority of samples from the Xifanping mining area are biotite quartz monzonite porphyries. Hand specimens and microscopic photographs of the samples are illustrated in Figure 3.
The yellowish-white biotite quartz monzonite porphyry had a porphyritic texture. Its massive structure featured phenocrysts (size: 0.4–2.0 cm) of biotite (5–8 vol.%), minor quartz (10–15 vol.%), K-feldspar (30–35 vol.%), and plagioclase (30–45 vol.%) (Figure 3a–c). The plagioclase phenocrysts had partial sericitization and looked like polysynthetic–subhedral twins (Figure 3c,d). The euhedral–subhedral K-feldspar was slightly altered and had a perthitic texture. The quartz phenocrysts were generally small and resorbed. Biotite was mostly euhedral–subhedral with partial sericitization. The groundmass featured biotite, feldspar, and quartz and had an aphanitic–semi-cryptocrystalline texture (Figure 3c). Apatite, titanite, and zircon were the accessory minerals.

4.2. Zircon U–Pb Ages

Table S1 gives the results of zircon U–Pb dating for the Xifanping monzonite porphyries (Figure 4). Most zircon grains from the porphyries appeared generally euhedral–subhedral, transparent, and brown prismatic (Figure 4a,b). We observed zircon grains with oscillatory zonation and Th/U ratios of more than 0.4, which showed that the magmatic zircons were typical [52]. Most of the zircon grains were between 50 and 150 μm and had aspect ratios of 1:1.5.
Table S1 lists the results for sample XFP1017 and sample XFP1013. The XFP1013 sample revealed 206Pb/238U ages between 30.96 and 32.48 Ma, with a weighted mean age of 31.87 ± 0.41 Ma (MSWD = 0.86). The Th/U ratios were between 0.63 and 1.23, as shown in Figure 4a). The XFP1013 sample revealed 206Pb/238U ages between 30.84 and 33.33 Ma, with a weighted mean age of 32.24 ± 0.61 Ma (MSWD = 1.8). The Th/U ratios were between 0.79 and 1.50, as shown in (Figure 4b). These ages date the emplacement of the monzonite porphyry. Thus, the results show that the Xifanping monzonite porphyry formed in the Himalayan magmatism during the Oligocene.
In addition, there was a small amount of inherited zircon grains found in monzonite porphyry samples, which were found as fractured fragments (Figure 4c). These zircon grains appeared generally euhedral–subhedral and transparent (Figure 4c). Most of the zircon grains were between 50 and 150 μm and had aspect ratios of 1:1.5. Part of these zircon grains had oscillatory zonation, and the Th/U ratios were between 0.65 and 1.46 (average 0.98), which is typical of magmatic zircon grains [52]. These inherited zircon grains exhibited 206Pb/238U ages between 236 and 263 Ma, with a weighted mean age of 254.9 ± 5.1 Ma (MSWD = 1.7), as shown in Figure 4c. The ages are concentrated in the Late Permian. The origin of the zircon grains is believed to be from either the deep basement of the Yangtze craton or the Late Permian clastic wall rocks.

4.3. Whole-Rock Geochemistry

The Xifanping monzonite porphyry samples had high contents of SiO2 (average 66.23 wt.%), Al2O3 (average 16.19 wt.%), and K2O (average 4.84 wt.%), with K2O/Na2O (average 1.10), A/CNK (average 1.51), and high Sr/Y ratios (average 73.74) (Table S2), but relatively low contents of MgO (average 1.09 wt.%), Mg# (average 36.42), Cr (average 26.11 ppm), and Ni (average 22.87 ppm) (Table S2). All samples were peraluminous, had values of A/CNK greater than 1.1, and high-K calc–alkalic to shoshonitic series (Figure 5b,c).
Figure 6a shows the 11 samples with primitive-mantle-normalized trace elements. None of the samples had distinct Eu anomalies (Eu/Eu* = 0.45–1.07), but all had depletions of high-field-strength elements (HFSE; e.g., Nb, Ta, and Zr) and enrichments of large-ion lithophile elements (LILE; e.g., Rb, K, and Ba enrichments). The results are given in Table S2 and are shown in Figure 6b. The total concentration of REE (∑REE) had a mean of 303.56 ppm and covered a wide range of 167.73–452.75 ppm. The light REE enrichment was over heavy REE enrichment in all of the samples. Elevated Sr/Y ratios (36.42–141.11, average 73.74) characterize all of these rocks as adakitic (Table S2) [53].
Minerals 14 00874 g004
Figure 4. (a–c) Representative zircon CL images and U–Pb concordia diagrams for the monzonite porphyries from the Xifanping deposit (white circles denote the laser spots). Uncertainties on individual analyses in data tables are reported at 1σ level; Concordia age plots show error ellipses at 2 σ and quote weighted mean ages with 95% confidence errors.
Figure 4. (a–c) Representative zircon CL images and U–Pb concordia diagrams for the monzonite porphyries from the Xifanping deposit (white circles denote the laser spots). Uncertainties on individual analyses in data tables are reported at 1σ level; Concordia age plots show error ellipses at 2 σ and quote weighted mean ages with 95% confidence errors.
Minerals 14 00874 g004
Minerals 14 00874 g005
Figure 5. Geochemical classification diagrams of samples from the Xifanping deposit. (a) TAS diagram [54]; (b) K2O vs. SiO2 [55]; (c) A/CNK vs. SiO2 [56] diagram. A/CNK = Al2O3/(CaO + Na2O + K2O).
Figure 5. Geochemical classification diagrams of samples from the Xifanping deposit. (a) TAS diagram [54]; (b) K2O vs. SiO2 [55]; (c) A/CNK vs. SiO2 [56] diagram. A/CNK = Al2O3/(CaO + Na2O + K2O).
Minerals 14 00874 g005
Minerals 14 00874 g006
Figure 6. (a) Primitive mantle-normalized multi-element patterns; (b) Chondrite-normalized REE patterns of monzonite porphyries samples from the Xifanping deposit. Normalizing data are from [57].
Figure 6. (a) Primitive mantle-normalized multi-element patterns; (b) Chondrite-normalized REE patterns of monzonite porphyries samples from the Xifanping deposit. Normalizing data are from [57].
Minerals 14 00874 g006

4.4. Zircon Lu–Hf Isotopic Data

Table S3 presents the monzonite porphyry sample results from in situ Hf isotopic data of zircons (Figure 7). The same zircon grains as those used for U–Pb dating (Figure 4). All samples received 23 spot analyses. We observed variable Hf isotopic compositions from the monzonite porphyry sample XFP1017. We found 176Hf/177Hf ratios between 0.282673 and 0.282802, values of εHf(t) between −2.80 and +1.77, and crustal model ages (TDM2) between 0.99 and 1.29 Ga (Table S3; Figure 7). In addition, we observed the Hf isotopic composition of sample XFP1103 and found 176Hf/177Hf ratios between 0.282669 and 0.282856, values of εHf(t) between −2.94 and +3.68, and Hf isotopic crustal model ages (TDM2) between 0.88 and 1.30 Ga (Table S3; Figure 7). The Hf isotopic compositions for the inherited zircons had initial 176Hf/177Hf ratios between 0.282664 and 0.282838, positive values of εHf(t) ranging between +1.83 and +7.98 (mean of +5.82), and Hf isotopic crustal model ages (TDM2) between 0.77 and 1.17 Ga (Table S3; Figure 7).

5. Discussion

5.1. Igneous Age

Precise dating of the host rocks and ore minerals can be used to determine the duration and timing of magmatism. At the Xifanping deposit, however, the emplacement age ranges (34.6 Ma to 100.8 Ma [42,43,44,45]) of monzonite porphyry reported previously were too great to determine the precise timing of magmatism. Hence, more accurate geochronological data are needed to clarify the age of magmatism at Xifanping.
At the Xifanping deposit, we collected two distinct sets of age data from the quartz monzonite porphyry (Table S1). One set indicates an emplacement age of approximately 32 Ma (31.87 ± 0.41 Ma, 32.24 ± 0.61 Ma; Figure 4), which represents Early Cenozoic magmatism. This age represents the emplacement time of main granitic porphyry magmas in the Xifanping mining area. Peak magmatism (ca. 34–37 Ma [22,41,58]) in the JSRR belt was slightly earlier than this emplacement age at Xifanping (Figure 1b). Nevertheless, the Xifanping deposit was still a significant magmatic-metallogenic event recorded in the western Yangtze craton of southwest China. Combining the spatial and temporal distribution characteristics of the JSRR igneous belt’s representative deposits (Figure 1b), the tectonic-magmatic evolution of this belt shows not only a significant migrating trend of gradually becoming younger from north to south [59] but also a lateral migration trend from west to east. The emplacement age of Xifanping is significantly younger than that of PCDs at similar latitudes, such as the Machangqing Cu–Mo–Au deposit (35.19 Ma) [22] and Beiya Cu–Au deposit (36.7 Ma) [9], indicating that the Cenozoic magmatic activity in this region migrated from the eastern part of the Tibetan Plateau to the southeast.
Another set of LA–ICP–MS zircon U–Pb ages from inherited zircons of the quartz monzonite porphyry is concentrated around 254.9 ± 5.1 Ma (Table S1; Figure 4c), which is Late Permian, consistent with the subduction of the Paleo-Tethyan oceanic slab during the Permian to Triassic period. We speculate that the formation of the Xifanping deposit was the result of a combined effect of two periods of magmatic activities. This pattern is due to the fact that the Xifanping deposit is located in zones that are tectonically weak and that are controlled by a composite fracture. The front of the Muli-Yanyuan tectonic nappe and the southwest margin of the Yangtze platform make up this composite fracture zone. These tectonically weak zones channeled early magmatic intrusive dikes (254.9 Ma) during the Indosinian period. In the Himalayan stage of collision and orogeny, late hydrothermal fluids and deep magmas took advantage of these tectonically weak zones as early magma transport channels. Some of the Indosinian early magmatic intrusive dikes melted and assimilated because of the heat of Himalayan magmas (ca. 32 Ma). We attribute these age variations in the porphyry intrusions of the Xifanping deposit to the mixing and assimilation of the Indosinian and Himalayan magmas.
Therefore, we infer that the monzonite porphyry intrusions at Xifanping were sourced from the products of Indosinian magmatism at 254.9 Ma and were mainly emplaced during the Himalayan magmatism at approximately 32 Ma. The combined effect of two periods of magma formed the unique Xifanping porphyry deposit.

5.2. Petrogenesis

During post-magmatic alteration, immobile elements, such as REEs and HFSEs, are generally stable [60]. We collected porphyry rock samples from the Xifanping deposit but did not find significant hydrothermal alteration. Petrographic observations and LOI data (LOI ≤ 2.67; mean = 2.08, Table S2) showed that the geochemical elements data of these samples could be used to evaluate porphyry rock petrogenesis at the Xifanping deposit.
Previous studies categorized the granitic rock as I- and S-type [61], A-type [62], and M-type [63] granites on the basis of their protolith nature and petrographic and geochemical features. In this study, the granitic rocks were geochemically distinct from the M-type granites. The latter were exemplified by their low K2O content (typically < 1%) [64]. The samples of Xifanping porphyry rocks all exhibit high values for Na2O + K2O of 8.19–10.61 wt% but relatively low values of Zr + Nb + Ce + Y (174–491 ppm) and (Na2O + K2O)/CaO (3.23–24.46, average 8.17) (Figure 8a). We attributed these features to high-K calc–alkalic to shoshonitic series, which distinguished them from A-type granites [65].
Moreover, our data also follow a partial melting trend in the La/Yb vs. La diagrams (Figure 8b). This demonstrates that partial melting of the source, instead of fractional crystallization, was the main petrogenesis process. In addition, the low P2O5 content (0.14–0.36 wt%) is in keeping with I-type granites [61]. Likewise, the mean value of the Nd/Ta ratio is 67.67 (32.90–119.50), which is clearly greater than the global upper crustal mean of 12.0 (Table S2) [70]. According to the results in Figure 6a, Rb, K, Ba, Th, and U have positive anomalies, which demonstrates the crustal element enrichment. As a result, we suggest that parts of the porphyry magma were derived from the melting of the crust. Additionally, the Y and Yb have significant negative anomalies and depleted P, which demonstrates that their sources were more likely derived from melting in the lower crust.
Furthermore, there is significant evidence to trace the magma source from zircon Lu–Hf compositions [71,72]. The values of zircon εHf(t) for the porphyry rocks range from −2.94 to +3.68 and from +1.83 to +7.98. The crustal model ages (TDM2) range from 0.88 to 1.30 Ga and from 0.77 to 1.17 Ga. These results are consistent with a source from the Neoproterozoic and Late Permian magmatic arc basement (Figure 7), which supports the findings of previous research. Hou et al. (2017) [20] and Zhou et al. (2018) [21], for example, found that the Neoproterozoic and Late Permian were the primary periods during which a thickened juvenile lower crust formed under the western margin of the Yangtze craton. The geochronological data reveals that the western margin of the Yangtze craton had an early magmatic arc basement and that potential sources of the Cenozoic porphyry magmas at the Xifanping deposit include juvenile lower crust materials of this early magmatic arc.

5.3. Geodynamic Mechanism

The granitic porphyries from the Xifanping deposit consistently fall within the Syn–collision and Volcanic arc granites range on the Rb-(Ta + Yb) and Nb-Y tectonic discrimination diagrams [67] (Figure 8c,d). We classify the tectonic environments as late syn-collisional to post-collisional extensional. This interpretation is supported by the fact that the eastern India–Asia collision zone transitioned into the late-collision stage around 40 Ma. The corresponding geodynamic setting is the transition to an extensional–tensional environment from an extrusional environment [41,73,74,75].
According to previous studies, the Paleo-Tethys Ocean experienced northward subduction at 264–225 Ma [35]. Post-subduction magmas had similar isotopic and geochemical characteristics to the prior arc magmatism [76,77,78]. We observed two sets of zircon U–Pb dates at 32 Ma and 254.9 Ma from the quartz monzonite porphyry and inherited zircons at the Xifanping deposit (Figure 4a–c). These two age values represent two tectonic-magmatic events from oceanic subduction to continental collision. Under similar tectonic settings, the younger ages (32 Ma) at Xifanping are very close to most of the Cenozoic porphyry deposits in the JSRR belt (Figure 1) [9,10,11]. Meanwhile, the older ages (254.9 Ma) at the Xifanping deposit align with the Paleo-Tethys oceanic subduction and closure [79,80]. Current research has suggested that this Paleo-Tethys subduction may have had a significant impact on the mineralization and large-scale magmatism of this period [81].
During the Paleo-Tethys oceanic plate subduction (~250 Ma), the initial accumulation in the lower crust and early continental magmatic arc were formed at the Yangtze plate’s western margin. The lower crust of the arc was underplated by juvenile mafic rocks (Figure 9a). During the collision between the Indian and Asian plates in the Cenozoic (~55 Ma), the subducted Indian continental lithosphere was torn into several pieces, which created an upwelling of hot asthenosphere through these slab-torn windows [82]. As the upwelling of the asthenosphere continued, the thickened lithosphere delaminated, and the subcontinental lithospheric mantle thinned, which caused crust extension [83,84].
During the Eocene–Oligocene (40–30 Ma), the mantle-derived magmas underplated the accumulated thickened lower crust. Then partial melting of the thickened juvenile lower crust triggered the granitoid magmas. Potential sources of granitoid magmas under the western margin of the Yangtze craton included Neoproterozoic and Late Permian juvenile lower crust materials of the early magmatic arc. At the same time, the extrusional environment transition to an extensional-tensional environment provided a favorable passage channel for late hydrothermal fluids and deep magma upwelling along the tectonically weak zones. The Indosinian early magmatic intrusive dikes were remelted and assimilated by the Late Himalayan magma. The Indosinian and Himalayan magma assimilation and mixing contributed to the porphyry magmas and ultimately formed a unique Xifanping porphyry Cu (Au) deposit (Figure 9b).

6. Conclusions

(1)
mplacement of the Xifanping Cu (Au) deposit is a significant magmatic-metallogenic event in the western Yangtze craton. Zircon U–Pb dating yields precise emplacement ages of 31.87 ± 0.41 Ma and 32.24 ± 0.61 Ma for ore-bearing quartz monzonite porphyry intrusions and 254.9 ± 5.1 Ma for inherited zircons. We infer that the formation of ore-forming porphyry intrusions was derived from Indosinian magmatism in the Late Permian and mainly formed in the Himalayan magmatism in the Oligocene. The combined effect of the two periods of magmatism formed the unique Xifanping porphyry deposit.
(2)
High-K calc–alkaline to shoshonite and peraluminous series characterizes the Xifanping ore-bearing monzonite porphyry. This series is relatively enriched in light over heavy REEs, without distinct Eu anomalies. The series is poor in HFSEs, rich in LILEs, and has adakitic affinities. The data range of zircon εHf(t) is between −2.94 and +3.68 (average −0.47). Crustal model (TDM2) ages range from 0.88 to 1.30 Ga. The inherited zircons have positive values of εHf(t) between +1.83 and +7.98 (average +5.82), and the crustal model (TDM2) ages are between 0.77 and 1.17 Ga. Potential sources of the porphyry magma at the Xifanping deposit include the Neoproterozoic and Late Permian thickened juvenile lower crust materials of the early magmatic arc.
(3)
Two periods of magmatic activities characterize the Xifanping deposit. Paleo-Tethys oceanic subduction generated early magmas during the Late Permian. The subsequent porphyry magma was likely formed by the remelting of previously subduction-modified arc lithosphere, triggered by a continental collision between the Indian and Asian plates in the Cenozoic. The deep magmas and late hydrothermal fluids took advantage of the early magma transport channels along tectonically weak zones during the transition from extrusive to extensional-tensional tectonic environment. Remelted and assimilated early magmatic intrusive dikes contributed to the two age ranges observed in the porphyry intrusions of the Xifanping deposit.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/min14090874/s1, Table S1. LA–ICP–MS zircon U–Pb data of monzonite porphyries from the Xifanping deposit. Table S2. Major (wt%) and trace (ppm) elemental test data of monzonite porphyries from the Xifanping deposit. Table S3. In situ zircon Lu–Hf isotopes data of monzonite porphyries from the Xifanping deposit.

Author Contributions

M.Y. and X.L. conception and design; M.Y., X.L., G.C., H.S. and Z.X. discussion; M.Y. and F.Z. field campaigns; M.Y. writing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Financial support was provided by the Natural Science Foundation of Sichuan Province (No. 23NSFSC0792) and the Research Start-up Project of Mianyang Normal University (No. QD2021A13).

Data Availability Statement

The study data are available upon request from the corresponding authors.

Acknowledgments

We thank all the members of Guoxiang Chi’s Lab from the University of Regina for assistance during fieldwork and data processing. Thank you to the teachers in the Wuhan Sample solution and Beijing for their help throughout this experiment. The suggestions and recommendations from anonymous reviewers to modify this article significantly improved and enhanced this research. We appreciate the input from all those who reviewed this paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Cooke, D.-R.; Hollings, P.; Walshe, J.-L. Giant porphyry deposits: Characteristics, distribution, and tectonic controls. Econ. Geol. 2005, 100, 801–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Sillitoe, R.-H. Porphyry copper systems. Econ. Geol. 2010, 105, 3–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Richards, J.-P.; Spell, T.; Rameh, E.; Razique, A.; Fletcher, T. High Sr/Y magmas reflect arc maturity, high magmatic water content, and porphyry Cu ± Mo ± Au potential: Examples from the Tethyan arcs of central and eastern Iran and western Pakistan. Econ. Geol. 2012, 107, 295–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Wang, R.; Weinberg, R.-F.; Collins, W.-J.; Richards, J.-P.; Zhu, D.-C. Origin of post-collisional magmas and formation of porphyry Cu deposits in southern Tibet. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2018, 181, 122–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Sun, X.; Lu, Y.-J.; McCuaig, T.-C.; Zheng, Y.-Y.; Chang, H.-F.; Guo, F.; Xu, L.-J. Miocene ultrapotassic, high-Mg dioritic, and adakite-like rocks from Zhunuo in Southern Tibet: Implications for mantle metasomatism and porphyry copper mineralization in collisional orogens. J. Petrol. 2018, 59, 341–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Hou, Z.-Q.; Wang, R. Fingerprinting metal transfer from mantle. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 3510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Guo, L.; Zhang, H.-F.; Harris, N.; Luo, B.-J.; Zhang, W.; Xu, W.-C. Tectonic erosion and crustal relamination during the India-Asian continental collision: Insights from Eocene magmatism in the southeastern Gangdese belt. Lithos 2019, 346, 105161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Wang, R.; Luo, C.-H.; Xia, W.-J.; Sun, Y.-C.; Liu, B.; Zhang, J.-B. Progresses in the Study of High Magmatic Water and Oxidation State of Post-collisional Magmas in the Gangdese Porphyry Deposit Belt. Bull. Mineral. Petrol. Geochem. 2021, 40, 1061–1077, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  9. He, W.-Y.; Mo, X.-X.; Yang, L.-Q.; Xing, Y.-L.; Dong, G.-C.; Yang, Z.; Gao, X.; Bao, X.-S. Origin of the Eocene porphyries and mafic microgranular enclaves from the Beiya porphyry Au polymetallic deposit, western Yunnan, China: Implications for magma mixing/mingling and mineralization. Gondwana Res. 2016, 40, 230–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Luo, C.-H. The Geochronology, Geochemistry Characteristics and Petrogenesis of the Alkali-Rich Porphyry in Yao’an, West Yunnan Province. Master’s Thesis, China University of Geosciences, Beijing, China, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  11. Xu, L.-L.; Zhu, J.-J.; Huang, M.-L.; Pan, L.-C.; Hu, R.; Bi, X.-W. Genesis of hydrous-oxidized parental magmas for porphyry Cu (Mo, Au) deposits in a post-collisional setting: Examples from the Sanjiang region, SW China. Miner. Depos. 2023, 58, 161–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Haschke, M.; Ahmadian, J.; Murata, M.; McDonald, I. Copper mineralization prevented by arc-root delamination during Alpine-Himalayan collision in central Iran. Econ. Geol. 2010, 105, 855–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Rabiee, A.; Rossetti, F.; Lucci, F.; Lustrino, M. Cenozoic porphyry and other hydrothermal ore deposits along the South Caucasus-West Iranian tectono-magmatic belt: A critical reappraisal of the controlling factors. Lithos 2022, 430, 106874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Martin, H.; Smithies, R.-H.; Rapp, R.; Moyen, J.-F.; Champion, D. An overview of adakite, tonalite–trondhjemite–granodiorite (TTG), and sanukitoid: Relationships and some implications for crustal evolution. Lithos 2005, 79, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Jiang, Y.-H.; Jiang, S.-Y.; Ling, H.-F.; Dai, B.-Z. Low-degree melting of a metasomatized lithospheric mantle for the origin of Cenozoic Yulong monzogranite-porphyry, east Tibet: Geochemical and Sr-Nd-Pb-Hf isotopic constraints. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2006, 241, 617–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Jiang, Y.-H.; Liu, Z.; Jia, R.-Y.; Liao, S.-Y.; Zhou, Q.; Zhao, P. Miocene potassic granite-syenite association in western Tibetan plateau: Implications for shoshonitic and high Ba-Sr granite genesis. Lithos 2012, 134–135, 146–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Castillo, P.-R.; Janney, P.-E.; Solidum, R.-U. Petrology and geochemistry of Camiguin island, southern Philippines: Insights to the source of adakites and other lavas in a complex arc setting. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1999, 134, 33–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Richards, J.-P.; Kerrich, R. Adakite-like rocks: Their diverse origins and questionable role in metallogenesis. Econ. Geol. 2007, 102, 534–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Chang, J.; Audétat, A. Post-subduction porphyry Cu magmas in the Sanjiang region of southwestern China formed by fractionation of lithospheric mantle–derived mafic magmas. Geology 2023, 51, 64–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Hou, Z.-Q.; Zhou, Y.; Wang, R.; Zheng, Y.-C.; He, W.-Y.; Zhao, M.; Evans, N.-J.; Weinberg, R.-F. Recycling of metal–fertilized lower continental crust: Origin of non–arc Au–rich porphyry deposits at cratonic edges. Geology 2017, 45, 563–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Zhou, Y.; Hou, Z.-Q.; Wang, R.; Zheng, Y.-C.; He, W.-Y.; Xu, B. Petrogenesis of Cenozoic high–Sr/Y shoshonites and associated mafic microgranular enclaves in an intracontinental setting: Implications for porphyry Cu-Au mineralization in western Yunnan, China. Lithos 2018, 324, 39–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Yang, M.-M.; Zhao, F.-F.; Liu, X.-F.; Qing, H.-R.; Chi, G.-X.; Li, X.-Y.; Lai, C.-K. Contribution of magma mixing to the formation of porphyry-skarn mineralization in a post-collisional setting: The Machangqing Cu-Mo-(Au) deposit, Sanjiang tectonic belt, SW China. Ore Geol. Rev. 2020, 122, 103518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Chung, S.-L.; Chu, M.-F.; Zhang, Y.-Q.; Xie, Y.-W.; Lo, C.-H.; Lee, T.-Y.; Lan, C.-Y.; Li, X.-H.; Zhang, Q.; Wang, Y.-Z. Tibetan tectonic evolution inferred from spatial and temporal variations in post-collisional magmatism. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2005, 68, 173–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Hou, Z.-Q.; Zhang, H.-R.; Pan, X.-F.; Yang, Z.-M. Porphyry Cu (–Mo–Au) deposits related to melting of thickened mafic lower crust: Examples from the eastern Tethyan metallogenic domain. Ore Geol. Rev. 2011, 39, 21–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Deng, J.; Wang, Q.-F.; Li, G.-J.; Santosh, M. Cenozoic tectono-magmatic and metallogenic processes in the Sanjiang region, southwestern China. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2014, 138, 268–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Bao, X.-X.; He, W.-Y.; Mao, J.-W.; Liang, T.; Wang, H.; Zhou, Y.; Wang, J. Redox states and genesis of Cu-and Au-mineralized granite porphyries in the jinshajiang Cu–Au metallogenic belt, SW China: Studies on the zircon chemistry. Miner. Depos. 2023, 58, 1123–1142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Metcalfe, I. Paleozoic and Mesozoic tectonic evolution and paleogeography of East Asian crustal fragments: The Korean Peninsula in context. Gondwana Res. 2006, 9, 24–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Xu, L.-L.; Bi, X.-W.; Hu, R.-Z.; Zhang, X.-C.; Su, W.-C.; Qu, W.-J.; Hu, Z.-C.; Tang, Y.-Y. Relationships between porphyry Cu–Mo mineralization in the Jinshajiang–Red River metallogenic belt and tectonic activity: Constraints from zircon U–Pb and molybdenite Re–Os geochronology. Ore Geol. Rev. 2012, 48, 460–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Hu, R.-Z.; Burnard, P.-G.; Bi, X.-W.; Zhou, M.-F.; Pen, J.-T.; Su, W.-C.; Wu, K.-X. Helium and argon isotope geochemistry of alkaline intrusion-associated gold and copper deposits along the Red River–Jinshajiang fault belt, SW China. Chem. Geol. 2004, 203, 305–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Gao, S.; Ling, W.-L.; Qiu, Y.-M.; Lian, Z.; Hartmann, G.; Simon, K. Constrasting geochemical and Sm-Nd isotopic compositions of Archean metasediments from the Kongling high-grade terrain of the Yangtze craton: Evidence for cratonic evolution and redistribution of REE during crust anatexis. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1999, 63, 2071–2088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Sun, W.-H.; Zhou, M.-F.; Gao, J.-F.; Yang, Y.-H.; Zhao, X.-F.; Zhao, J.-H. Detrital zircon U-Pb geochronological and Lu-Hf isotopic constraints on the Precambrian magmatic and crustal evolution of the western Yangtze Block, SW China. Precambrian Res. 2009, 172, 99–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Zhou, M.-F.; Ma, Y.-X.; Yan, D.-P.; Xia, X.-P.; Zhao, J.-H.; Sun, M. The Yanbian Terrane (Southern Sichuan Province, SW China): A Neoproterozoic arc assemblage in the western margin of the Yangtze Block. Precambrian Res. 2006, 144, 19–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Cawood, P.-A.; Wang, Y.-J.; Xu, Y.-J.; Zhao, G.-C. Locating South China in Rodinia and Gondwana: A fragment of greater India lithosphere? Geology 2013, 41, 903–906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Du, L.-L.; Guo, J.-H.; Nutman, A.-P.; Wyman, D.; Geng, Y.-S.; Yang, C.-H.; Liu, F.-L.; Ren, L.-D.; Zhou, X.-W. Implications for Rodinia reconstructions for the initiation of Neoproterozoic subduction at ~860 Ma on the western margin of the Yangtze Block: Evidence from the Guandaoshan pluton. Lithos 2014, 196–197, 67–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zou, F.-H.; Wu, C.-L.; Gao, D.; Deng, L.-H.; Gao, Y.-H. Triassic granites in theWest Qinling Orogen, China: Implications for the Early Mesozoic tectonic evolution of the Paleo-Tethys ocean. Int. Geol. Rev. 2022, 65, 1–33. [Google Scholar]
  36. Wang, X.-F.; Metcalfe, I.; Jian, P.; He, L.-Q.; Wang, C.-S. The Jinshajiang- Ailaoshan Suture zone, China: Tectonostratigraphy, age and evolution. Asian Earth Sci. 2000, 18, 675–690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Lu, Y.-J.; McCuaig, T.-C.; Li, Z.-X.; Jourdan, F.; Hart, C.-J.-R.; Hou, Z.-Q.; Tang, S.-H. Paleogene post-collisional lamprophyres in western Yunnan, western Yangtze Craton: Mantle source and tectonic implications. Lithos 2015, 233, 139–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Lu, Y.-J.; Kerrich, R.; Kemp, A.-I.-S.; McCuaig, T.-C.; Hou, Z.-Q.; Hart, C.-J.-R.; Li, Z.-X.; Cawood, P.-A.; Bagas, L.; Yang, Z.-M.; et al. Intracontinental Eocene-Oligocene porphyry Cu mineral systems of Yunnan, Western Yangtze Craton, China: Compositional characteristics, sources, and implications for continental collision metallogeny. Econ. Geol. 2013, 108, 1541–1576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Fu, F.; Yang, Z.-S.; Zhao, L.-Q. Metallogeneny and Resources Prodiction for the Xifanping Porphyry Cu Deposit. Sichuan J. Geol. 2014, 34, 44–48, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  40. Xu, S.-J.; Shen, W.-Z.; Wang, R.-C.; Lu, J.-J.; Lin, Y.-P.; Ni, P.; Luo, Y.-N.; Li, L.-Z. Characteristics and genesis of Xifanping porphyry copper deposit in Yanyuan, Sichuan Province. J. Mineral. 1997, 1, 56–62. [Google Scholar]
  41. Hou, Z.-Q.; Zeng, P.-S.; Gao, Y.-F.; Du, A.-D.; Fu, D.-M. Himalayan Cu–Mo–Au mineralization in the eastern Indo–Asian collision zone: Constraints from Re–Os dating of molybdenite. Miner. Depos. 2006, 41, 33–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Fu, D.-M.; Xu, M.-J. Geological characteristics of the silver polymetallic deposit in Jiacun, Sichuan Province and its analogy with the Black ore deposit in Japan. J. Sichuan Geol. 1996, 16, 67–72, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  43. Li, L.-Z.; Zhao, Z.-G.; He, J.-L. Geological characteristics of Himalayan porphyry copper deposit in Mofan Village, Yanyuan, Sichuan Province. Miner. Depos. Geol. 2006, 25, 269–280. [Google Scholar]
  44. Ding, H.; Hou, Q.; Zhang, Z. Petrogenesis and tectonic significance of the Eocene adakite-like rocks in western Yunnan, southeastern Tibetan Plateau. Lithos 2016, 245, 161–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Zhang, H.; Ma, D.-F.; Zhang, H.; Liu, H.; Zhang, Y.; Jin, C.-H.; Shen, Z.-W. Zircon LA-ICP-MS U-Pb Dating and Geological Significance of Quartz Monzonite-Porphyry from Xifanping Copper Deposit in Yanyuan County, Sichuan Province, China. Acta Mineral. Sin. 2017, 37, 475–485, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  46. Black, L.-P.; Kamo, S.-L.; Allen, C.-M.; Aleinikoff, J.-N.; Davis, D.-W.; Korsch, R.-J.; Foudoulis, C. TEMORA 1: A new zircon standard for Phanerozoic U-Pb geochronology. Chem. Geol. 2003, 200, 155–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Sláma, J.; Košler, J.; Condon, D.-J.; Crowley, J.-L.; Gerdes, A.; Hanchar, J.-M.; Horstwood, M.-S.-A.; Morris, G.-A.; Nasdala, L.; Norberg, N.; et al. Plešovice zircon—A new natural reference material for U–Pb and Hf isotopic microanalysis. Chem. Geol. 2008, 249, 1–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Wiedenbeck, M.; Alle, P.; Corfu, F.; Griffin, W.-L.; Meier, M.; Oberli, F.; Quadt, A.-V.; Roddick, J.-C.; Spiegel, W. Three natural zircon standards for U–Th–Pb, Lu–Hf, trace-element and REE analyses. Geostand. Newsl. 1995, 19, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Li, X.-H.; Tang, G.-Q.; Guo, B.; Yang, Y.-H.; Hou, K.-J.; Hu, Z.-C.; Li, Q.-L.; Liu, Y.; Li, W.-X. Qinghu zircon: A working reference for microbeam analysis of U–Pb age and Hf and O isotopes. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2013, 36, 4647–4654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Hu, Z.; Liu, Y.; Gao, S.; Liu, W.; Zhang, W.; Tong, X.; Zhou, L. Improved in situ Hf isotope ratio analysis of zircon using newly designed X skimmer cone and jet sample cone in combination with the addition of nitrogen by laser ablation multiple collector ICP-MS. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. 2012, 27, 1391–1399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Gao, J.-F.; Lu, J.-J.; Lin, Y.-P.; Pu, W. Analysis of trace elements in rock samples using HR-ICPMS. J. Nanjing Univ. (Nat. Sci.) 2003, 39, 844–850, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  52. Hoskin, P.; Schaltegger, U. The Composition of Zircon and Igneous and Metamorphic Petrogenesis. Rev. Mineral. Geochem. 2003, 53, 27–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Defant, M.-J.; Drummond, M.-S. Derivation of some modern arc magmas by melting of young subducted lithosphere. Nature 1990, 347, 662–665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Middlemost, E.-A.-K. Naming Materials in the Magma/igneous Rock System. Earth Sci. Rev. 1994, 37, 215–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Collins, W.-J.; Scams, S.-D.; White, A.-J.-R. Nature and Origin of A–Type Uranitcs with Particular Reference to Southeastern Australia. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1982, 80, 189–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Maniar, P.-D.; Piccole, I.-P.-M. Tectonic Discrimination of Granitoids. Geol. Soc. Am. 1989, 101, 635–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Sun, S.-S.; McDonough, W.-F. Chemical and isotopic systematics of oceanic basalts, implications for mantle composition and processes. Geol. Soc. Lond. Spec. Publ. 1989, 42, 313–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Yang, M.-M.; Zhao, F.-F.; Liu, X.-F.; Qing, H.-R.; Raharimahefa, T.; Duan, W.-J. Petrogenesis and geodynamic setting of granitoids at Machangqing Cu–Mo (Au) deposit, western Yangtze craton, southwestern China: Constraints from zircon U–Pb and molybdenite Re–Os geochronology, Lu–Hf isotopes, and geochemistry. Can. J. Earth Sci. 2020, 57, 1066–1088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Wang, R.; Zhang, J.-B.; Luo, C.-H.; Zhou, Q.-S.; Xia, W.-J.; Zhao, Y. Control of Deep Processes and Material Structure on Cu-REE Metallogenic System in Continental Collision Belt: A Case Study of Gangdise and Sanjiang Collision Belt; Tongfang Knowledge Network (Beijing) Technology Co., Ltd.: Beijing, China, 2023; (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Hawkesworth, C.-J.; Turner, S.-P.; McDermott, F.; Peate, D.-M.; Calsteren, V.-P. U–Th isotopes in arc magmas: Implications for element transfer from subducted crust. Science 1997, 276, 561–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Chappell, B.-W.; White, A.-J.-R. I– and S–type granites in the Lachlan Fold Belt. Trans. R. Soc. Edinb.–Earth Sci. 1992, 83, 1–26. [Google Scholar]
  62. Loiselle, M.-C.; Wones, D.-R. Characteristics and origin of anorogenic granites. Geol. Soc. Am. Abstr. Programs 1979, 11, 468. [Google Scholar]
  63. White, A.-J.-R. Sources of granite magmas. Geol. Soc. Am. 1979, 11, 539. [Google Scholar]
  64. Hu, P.-Y.; Li, C.; Li, J.; Wang, M.; Xie, C.-M.; Wu, Y.-W. Zircon U-Pb-Hf isotopes and whole-rock geochemistry of gneissic granites from the Jitang complex in Leiwuqi area, eastern Tibet, China: Record of the closure of the Paleo-Tethys Ocean. Tectonophysics 2014, 623, 83–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Eby, G.-N. Chemical subdivision of the A-type granitoids: Petrogenetic and tectonic implications. Geology 1992, 20, 641–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Whalen, J.-B.; Currie, K.-L.; Chappell, B.-W. A-type granites: Geochemical characteristics, discrimination and petrogenesis. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1987, 95, 407–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Pearce, J.-A.; Harris, N.-B.-W.; Tindle, A.-G. Trace element discrimination diagrams for the tectonic interpretation of granitic rocks. J. Petrol. 1984, 25, 956–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Huang, J.-H. Comparative Study on the Petrogenesis of the Ore-Bearing and Barren Porphyries from the Xifanping Copper Deposit in Yuan; China University of Geosciences (Beijing): Beijing, China, 2019; (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Qiu, L. Origin and Deep Process of Cenozoic Alkali-Rich Porphyry in Taozi Xiang, Yanyuan, Sichuan; China University of Geosciences (Beijing): Beijing, China, 2020; (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Taylor, S.-R.; Mclennan, S.-M. The Continental Crust: Its Composition and Evolution; An Examination of the Geochemical Record Preserved in Sedimentary Rock; Blackwell Scientific Publication: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1985; pp. 1–328. [Google Scholar]
  71. Wang, C.-M.; Deng, J.; Santosh, M.; McCuaig, T.-C.; Lu, Y.-J.; Carranza, E.-J.-M.; Wang, Q.-F. Age and origin of the Bulangshan and Mengsong granitoids and their significance for post-collisional tectonics in the Changning-Menglian Paleo-Tethys Orogen. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2015, 113, 656–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Wang, C.-M.; Deng, J.; Bagas, L.; Wang, Q. Zircon Hf-isotopic mapping for understanding crustal architecture and metallogenesis in the Eastern Qinling Orogen. Gondwana Res. 2017, 50, 293–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Wang, E.-C.; Buchifel, B.-C. Interpretation of Cenozoic tectonics in the right-lateral accommodation zone between the AilaoShan shear zone and the eastern Himalayan syntaxis. Int. Geol. Rev. 1997, 39, 191–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Wang, J.-H.; Yin, A.; Harrison, T.-M.; Grove, M.; Zhang, Y.-Q.; Xie, G.-H. A tectonic model for Cenozoic igneous activities in the eastern Indo–Asian collision zone. Earth Planet 2001, 88, 123–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Hou, Z.-Q.; Pan, X.-F.; Yang, Z.-M.; Qu, X.-M. Porphyry Cu–(Mo–Au) deposits not related to oceanic-slab subduction: Examples from Chinese porphyry deposits in continental setting. Geosciences 2007, 21, 332–351, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  76. Richards, J.-P. Post subduction porphyry Cu-Au and epithermal Au deposits: Products of remelting of subduction-modified lithosphere. Geology 2009, 37, 247–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Chen, J.-L.; Xu, J.-F.; Wang, B.-D.; Yang, Z.-M.; Ren, J.-B.; Yu, H.-X.; Liu, H.-F.; Feng, Y.-X. Geochemical differences between subduction-and collision-related copper-bearing porphyries and implications for metallogenesis. Ore Geol. Rev. 2015, 70, 424–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Xu, J.; Zheng, Y.-Y.; Sun, X.; Shen, Y.-H. Geochronology and petrogenesis of Miocene granitic intrusions related to the Zhibula Cu skarn deposit in the Gangdese belt, southern Tibet. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2016, 120, 100–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Deng, J.-H.; Yang, X.-Y.; Zartman, R.-E.; Qi, H.-S.; Zhang, L.-P.; Liu, H.; Zhang, Z.-F.; Mastoi, A.-S.; Al Emil, G.-B.; Sun, W.-D. Early cretaceous transformation from Pacific to Neo-Tethys subduction in the SW Pacific Ocean: Constraints from Pb-Sr-Nd-Hf isotopes of the Philippine arc. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2020, 285, 21–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Deng, J.-H.; Yang, X.-Y.; Qi, H.-S.; Zhang, Z.-F.; Mastoi, A.-S.; Al Emil, G.-B.; Sun, W.-D. Early Cretaceous adakite from the Atlas porphyry Cu-Au deposit in Cebu Island, Central Philippines: Partial melting of subducted oceanic crust. Ore Geol. Rev. 2019, 110, 102937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Sun, W.-D. Initiation and evolution of the South China Sea: An overview. Chin. J. Geochem. 2016, 35, 215–225. [Google Scholar]
  82. Hou, Z.; Wang, R.; Zhang, H.; Zheng, Y.; Thybo, H.; Zhang, L. Formation of giant copper deposits in Tibet driven by tearing of the subducted Indian plate. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2023, 243, 104482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Mo, X.-X.; Niu, Y.-L.; Dong, G.-C.; Zhao, Z.-D.; Hou, Z.-Q.; Zhou, S.; Ke, S. Contribution of syn collisional felsic magmatism to continental crust growth: A case study of the Paleogene Linzizong volcanic Succession in southern Tibet. Chem. Geol. 2008, 250, 49–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Liu, D.; Zhao, Z.-D.; DePaolo, D.-J.; Zhu, D.-C.; Meng, F.-Y.; Shi, Q.-S.; Wang, Q. Potassic volcanic rocks and adakitic intrusions in southern Tibet: Insights into mantle–crust interaction and mass transfer from Indian plate. Lithos 2017, 268, 48–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Minerals 14 00874 g001
Figure 1. (a) Distribution of principal continental blocks and sutures of the east Tethyan belt (modified from [27]). (b) Tectonic framework of the Sanjiang region in southwest China, showing the major terranes, suture zones, arc volcanic belts, Cenozoic igneous rocks, and Cenozoic porphyry Cu–Mo–Au deposits (modified from [9,25]). The ages of the zircon U–Pb and molybdenite Re-Os for the porphyry-skarn ore belt in western Yunnan are from [28].
Figure 1. (a) Distribution of principal continental blocks and sutures of the east Tethyan belt (modified from [27]). (b) Tectonic framework of the Sanjiang region in southwest China, showing the major terranes, suture zones, arc volcanic belts, Cenozoic igneous rocks, and Cenozoic porphyry Cu–Mo–Au deposits (modified from [9,25]). The ages of the zircon U–Pb and molybdenite Re-Os for the porphyry-skarn ore belt in western Yunnan are from [28].
Minerals 14 00874 g001
Minerals 14 00874 g002
Figure 2. Simplified geologic map of the Xifanping deposit. (a) Regional structural domain map of Xifanping deposit; (b) Geologic sketch map of the Xifanping deposit, showing the sampling locations (modified after [40]); (c) Simplified geologic map showing the alteration zonation and mineralization in the Xifanping deposit (modified after [41]).
Figure 2. Simplified geologic map of the Xifanping deposit. (a) Regional structural domain map of Xifanping deposit; (b) Geologic sketch map of the Xifanping deposit, showing the sampling locations (modified after [40]); (c) Simplified geologic map showing the alteration zonation and mineralization in the Xifanping deposit (modified after [41]).
Minerals 14 00874 g002
Minerals 14 00874 g003
Figure 3. Representative photographs and photomicrographs of rock samples of the Xifanping deposit. (a,b) Outcrop of monzonite porphyry intrusions in the field; (c,d) Fine-grained and medium-grained monzonite porphyries samples; (e,f) Major rock-forming minerals in ore-bearing porphyry (plane-polarized light); (g,h) The plagioclase phenocrysts appear as subhedral and polysynthetic twins with partly sericitization (cross-polarized light); (i,j) Veined chalcopyrite and pyrite in monzonite porphyry (reflected light). Abbreviations: Pl: plagioclase; Kfs: potash feldspar; Bi: biotite; Otz: quartz; Py: pyrite; Ccp: chalcopyrite.
Figure 3. Representative photographs and photomicrographs of rock samples of the Xifanping deposit. (a,b) Outcrop of monzonite porphyry intrusions in the field; (c,d) Fine-grained and medium-grained monzonite porphyries samples; (e,f) Major rock-forming minerals in ore-bearing porphyry (plane-polarized light); (g,h) The plagioclase phenocrysts appear as subhedral and polysynthetic twins with partly sericitization (cross-polarized light); (i,j) Veined chalcopyrite and pyrite in monzonite porphyry (reflected light). Abbreviations: Pl: plagioclase; Kfs: potash feldspar; Bi: biotite; Otz: quartz; Py: pyrite; Ccp: chalcopyrite.
Minerals 14 00874 g003
Minerals 14 00874 g007
Figure 7. Variation of zircon εHf(t) isotope values vs the U–Pb ages of the zircons studied. The blue and purple fields represent episodes of major juvenile crustal growth of the western margin of Yangtze Craton in the Neoproterozoic and late Permian, respectively [21]. DM: Depleted Mantle; CHUR: Chondritic Uniform Reservoir.
Figure 7. Variation of zircon εHf(t) isotope values vs the U–Pb ages of the zircons studied. The blue and purple fields represent episodes of major juvenile crustal growth of the western margin of Yangtze Craton in the Neoproterozoic and late Permian, respectively [21]. DM: Depleted Mantle; CHUR: Chondritic Uniform Reservoir.
Minerals 14 00874 g007
Minerals 14 00874 g008
Figure 8. (a) (Na2O + K2O)/CaO vs. Zr + Nb + Ce + Y [66]; (b) La/Yb vs. La diagrams for porphyry rocks from the Xifanping; Tectonic discrimination diagrams for the Xifanping porphyry rocks. (c) Rb vs. (Ta + Yb) diagram [67]; (d) Nb vs. Y diagram [67]. The monzonite porphyry literature data are from [68,69].
Figure 8. (a) (Na2O + K2O)/CaO vs. Zr + Nb + Ce + Y [66]; (b) La/Yb vs. La diagrams for porphyry rocks from the Xifanping; Tectonic discrimination diagrams for the Xifanping porphyry rocks. (c) Rb vs. (Ta + Yb) diagram [67]; (d) Nb vs. Y diagram [67]. The monzonite porphyry literature data are from [68,69].
Minerals 14 00874 g008
Minerals 14 00874 g009
Figure 9. Geodynamic mechanism model for the origin of Xifanping rocks in the western margin of Yangtze Craton. (a) During the Paleo–Tethys oceanic plate subduction (~250 Ma), the initial accumulation in the lower crust and early continental magmatic arc were formed at the Yangtze plate’s western margin. The lower crust of the arc was underplated by juvenile mafic rocks; (b) During the Eocene–Oligocene (40–30 Ma), the mantle–derived magmas underplated the accumulated thickened lower crust. Then the partial melting of the thickened juvenile lower crust triggered the granitoid magmas. Potential sources of granitoid magmas under the western margin of the Yangtze craton include Neoproterozoic and Late Permian juvenile lower crust materials of the early magmatic arc.
Figure 9. Geodynamic mechanism model for the origin of Xifanping rocks in the western margin of Yangtze Craton. (a) During the Paleo–Tethys oceanic plate subduction (~250 Ma), the initial accumulation in the lower crust and early continental magmatic arc were formed at the Yangtze plate’s western margin. The lower crust of the arc was underplated by juvenile mafic rocks; (b) During the Eocene–Oligocene (40–30 Ma), the mantle–derived magmas underplated the accumulated thickened lower crust. Then the partial melting of the thickened juvenile lower crust triggered the granitoid magmas. Potential sources of granitoid magmas under the western margin of the Yangtze craton include Neoproterozoic and Late Permian juvenile lower crust materials of the early magmatic arc.
Minerals 14 00874 g009
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

Yang, M.; Li, X.; Chi, G.; Song, H.; Xu, Z.; Zhao, F. Petrogenesis and Geodynamic Mechanisms of Porphyry Copper Deposits in a Collisional Setting: A Case from an Oligocene Porphyry Cu (Au) Deposit in Western Yangtze Craton, SW China. Minerals 2024, 14, 874. https://doi.org/10.3390/min14090874

AMA Style

Yang M, Li X, Chi G, Song H, Xu Z, Zhao F. Petrogenesis and Geodynamic Mechanisms of Porphyry Copper Deposits in a Collisional Setting: A Case from an Oligocene Porphyry Cu (Au) Deposit in Western Yangtze Craton, SW China. Minerals. 2024; 14(9):874. https://doi.org/10.3390/min14090874

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yang, Mimi, Xingyuan Li, Guoxiang Chi, Hao Song, Zhengqi Xu, and Fufeng Zhao. 2024. "Petrogenesis and Geodynamic Mechanisms of Porphyry Copper Deposits in a Collisional Setting: A Case from an Oligocene Porphyry Cu (Au) Deposit in Western Yangtze Craton, SW China" Minerals 14, no. 9: 874. https://doi.org/10.3390/min14090874

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