Next Article in Journal
Geology and Genesis of Xianglushan Fe-Cu Orefield in Sichuan (SW China): Evidence from C-O-S-Pb Isotopes
Previous Article in Journal
Detection of Trace Elements/Isotopes in Olympic Dam Copper Concentrates by nanoSIMS
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Minerals
Volume 9
Issue 6
10.3390/min9060337
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

Copper Mineralization Potential of Late Triassic Granitoids in Northern Yidun Arc, SW China

by
Xing-Yuan Li
1,2,*,
Jing-Ru Zhang
3,
Hao Song
2,* and
Chun-Kit Lai
4,5
1
School of Geography and Planning, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China
2
Department of Geology, University of Regina, Regina, SK S4S 0A2, Canada
3
Guangdong Province Academic of Environmental Science, Guangzhou 510045, China
4
Faculty of Science, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Gadong BE1410, Brunei
5
Centre of Excellence in Ore Deposits (CODES), University of Tasmania, Tasmania 7001, Australia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Minerals 2019, 9(6), 337; https://doi.org/10.3390/min9060337
Submission received: 9 May 2019 / Revised: 21 May 2019 / Accepted: 27 May 2019 / Published: 1 June 2019
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Yidun arc is an important constituent of the Sanjiang Tethyan Domain in SW China. The Changdagou pluton, located in the northern part of the Yidun Arc, mainly consists of granodiorite. In this study, we conducted in-situ LA-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb dating, and trace element and Hf isotope analyses on the Changdagou granites. Age dating results yielded a weighted mean U-Pb age of 214.97 ± 0.98 Ma (MSWD = 1.2, 2σ), broadly coeval with extensive late Triassic magmatism across the Yidun Arc. All zircon grains analyzed showed high concentrations of Th, U, and HREE, with positive Ce and negative Eu anomalies. Logfo2 and CeN/CeN* values vary from FMQ −3.14 to FMQ +7.44 (average FMQ +3.98), and 14 to 172 (avg. 98), respectively. The zircon EuN/EuN* (avg. 0.22) ratios have no clear correlation with the CeN/CeN* ratios, suggesting that the former were mainly affected by the magma water content. In addition, zircon εHf(t) values vary in a narrow range (–2.9 to −4.9, avg. −3.4) that clusters around zero, indicating a greater component of mantle-derived magma. Hence, we propose that the Changdagou granodiorite was derived from a highly oxidized, “wet”, Cu-rich source, of the type likely to generate porphyry Cu mineralization. However, these parameters (logfO2, EuN/EuN*, (Ce/Nd)/Y, and εHf(t)) are all lower than those of intrusions associated with Cu ores at Pulang and Lannitang, which may explain why the Cu deposit discovered at Changdagou is small by comparison. Furthermore, on the basis of the decreasing trends of εHf, logfO2, and H2O content from south to north along the Yiduan arc, we infer that the northern segment of the Yidun arc (including Changdagou) was located further away from the subduction front.

1. Introduction

The Sanjiang Tethyan Domain in the southeastern Tibet Plateau comprises various (micro)-continental blocks, volcanic arcs, and ophiolitic belts that were formed during the opening and closure of the Paleo-Tethys (Figure 1) [1]. The NNW-trending Yidun structure is the largest island arc preserved in the domain [2,3,4], and a number of important porphyry copper deposits (PCDs) were found in its southern section, such as the Pulang, Lannitang and Xuejiping. These PCDs were mainly formed in the Late Triassic (208–235 Ma) during the Indosinian Orogeny [5,6,7]. In contrast, only a few PCDs have been discovered in the northern section of the arc, with the Changdagou PCD being the largest one [8]. This raises questions on whether the paucity of PCD discovery is an issue of exploration work, deposit preservation, or a combination of these factors.
Redox state and water content of magmas are widely believed to be contributing factors for the formation of PCDs. Recent studies [9,10,11,12,13,14] revealed that zircon grain composition is sensitive to these factors, and can serve as an indicator of the magma physicochemical conditions. Ballard et al. [15] suggest PCDs are associated with zircon Ce4+/Ce3+ > 300 of magma, whilst Dilles [12] suggest that PCD fertile magmas commonly have EuN/EuN* >0.3. More recently, Lu et al. [14] argue that zircon trace element ratios, such as EuN/EuN*, Dy/Yb, and (EuN/EuN*)/Y, can serve as proxies for the water content in magma. In addition, Hf isotopic signatures (εHf) can indicate whether the magma source was juvenile (with higher εHf, i.e., close to the mantle value and enriched in radiogenic 176Hf) or from an evolved, typically ancient crustal source (with lower εHf; [16,17,18]).
In this paper, we present a new zircon U-Pb age, trace element chemical and Hf isotope data on the Changdagou granodiorite porphyry in the northern Yidun arc. We discuss the redox state, water content, and possible magmatic source of the Changdagou granites, and compare these parameters with those in the Lannitang and Pulang granites in the southern Yidun arc. We evaluate some differences in mineralization potential between the northern and southern sections of the Yidun arc.

2. Geological Background

The Yidun arc and its PCDs have been described in many publications [1,16,19]. In brief, the Yidun arc is located between the Jinshajiang and Ganzi-Litang Paleo-Tethyan suture zones [2,20,21]. During the Late Triassic, closure of the Ganzi-Litang ocean basin might have led to the accretion of the Zhongza terrane onto the Yangtze craton via the Yidun arc [22] (Figure 1). It has been suggested that the Yidun arc was developed on the basement with the Yangtze craton inheritance [4,6,19], and underwent two magmatic episodes in the Late Triassic (218–230 Ma) and Late Cretaceous (88–105 Ma), responding the Paleo-Tethyan subduction and subsequent continent–continent collision (Figure 1a). The subduction-related magmatism formed several large granodioritic-granitic batholiths (e.g., Changdagou, Shengmu, Cuojiaoma and Daocheng) in the northern Yidun arc [16,22], and dioritic-granitic stocks (e.g., Pulang and Lannitang) in the southern Yidun arc (also called the Zhongdian arc) [11,23,24,25].
The Changdagou PCD (~35 km from Dege city) is located in the northern Yidun arc, and contains ~76 kt Cu reserve [8]. The Changdagou intrusive complex intruded the black-gray slate and sandstone of the Upper Triassic Lanashan Formation (Figure 2). The intrusive complex comprises mainly granodiorite porphyry and minor quartz diorite porphyry stocks, and Changdagou PCD is closely related to the granodiorite porphyry. In this study, one granodiorite porphyry sample was collected from drill cores, which contain quartz (10–15%), plagioclase (25–55%), K-feldspar (10–30%) and biotite (3–5%), with accessory titanite, apatite, pyrite, and magnetite.
Major alteration types in the Changdagou granite are silicic, potassic, sericite, argillic (kaolinite) and propylitic. Silicification occurs mainly in the ore-forming granodiorite and the silicified rocks in its exo-contact, and the orebody in the silicified zone is of higher grade. Quartz-calcite veins intersect each other in a grid pattern, and are unevenly distributed in the intrusion. Potassic alteration is distinct, and often contains veinlet/disseminated sulfide mineralization. Sericitization is most prevalent in the mining area, and is manifested as fine scaly aggregates in the metasomatic matrix. Mineralization intensity at Changdagou is clearly related to the alteration style. Strongly mineralized and highest grade (up to 1.64%) areas are mainly concentrated in the potassic and silicic zones. Low-grade mineralization (<0.4%) is also developed in/around the sericite zones.

3. Methods

3.1. Zircon Morphology and Texture

Zircon separation was conducted on ~2 kg crushed rock sample at the Langfang Geological Laboratory (Langfang, China). Approximately 100–200 zircon grains from each sample were mounted in an epoxy resin disc. Before the U-Pb isotope analysis, all grains were observed under transmitted and reflected-light microscopy, as well as cathodoluminescence (CL) imaging to reveal their internal structure. All the CL imaging, U-Pb dating, trace element chemical and Hf isotopic analyses were performed at the Wuhan Sample Solution Analytical Technology Co. Ltd. (Wuhan, China). Zircon CL imaging was conducted with the Analytical Scanning Electron Microscope (JSMIT100, JEOL, Tokyo, Japan) connected to a GATAN MINICL system. The imaging conditions include 10,013.0 kV electric field and 8085 µA current of tungsten filament.

3.2. Zircon U-Pb Dating and Trace-Element Analyses

U-Pb dating and trace element analyses on zircon were simultaneously conducted with laser ablation-inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS). Detailed operating conditions for the laser ablation system and the ICP-MS instrument and data reduction are as described by Zong et al. [26]. The analyses were performed with a GeolasPro laser ablation system that consists of a COMPexPro 102 ArF excimer laser (193 nm wavelength and 200 mJ maximum energy) and a MicroLas optical system. An Agilent 7700e ICP-MS instrument (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA) was used to acquire ion-signal intensities. Helium was used as a carrier gas, and argon was used as the make-up gas that mixed with the carrier gas via a T-connector before entering the ICP. A “wire” signal smoothing device is included in this laser ablation system [27]. The spot size and frequency of the laser were set to 32 µm and 5 Hz, respectively. Zircon GJ-1 was used as the external standards for U-Pb dating and trace element calibration [28], respectively. Each analysis consists of a 20–30 s background acquisition followed by a 50 s sample data acquisition. In addition, the off-line selection and integration of background and analyzed signals, quantitative calibration for trace element analysis and time-drift correction and U-Pb dating were carried out with the Excel-based ICPMSDataCal software (Version 10.9, China University of Gersciences, Wuhan, China) [27]. The common lead correction was corrected with the measured 204Pb concentration [28,29]. Concordia diagrams and weighted mean calculations were calculated by the Isoplot/Ex_ver3 [30].

3.3. Zircon Hf Isotopic Analyses

The in-situ zircon Hf analyses were carried out by the Neptune multicollector (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (MC-ICP-MS) instrument equipped with a Geolas-193 laser ablation system at the Wuhan Sample Solution Analytical Technology Co. Ltd., Wuhan, China. During the analyses, a spot size of 44 μm and laser repetition of 8 Hz with energy density of 5.3 J/cm2 were used. Detailed operating conditions and procedures for the MC-ICP-MS analyses are as described in Hu et al. [27]. Notably, the spot locations of Hf isotopic analyses were presented in Figure 3. In addition, in-situ zircon Hf isotopes analysis requires careful correction for isobaric interferences on 176Hf (e.g., 176Yb and 176Lu). It has been observed that the mass fractionation of Yb (βYb) is not constant over time. Besides, the βYb obtained from the introduction of solutions is unsuitable for in situ zircon measurements [31]. The miscalculation of the βYb value will evidently affect the results of the 176Hf/177Hf ratio. In this research, we used the directly obtained βYb value from the zircon grains in real-time. Moreover, the 173Yb/171Yb and 179Hf/177Hf values were applied to estimate the mass bias of Yb (βYb) and Hf (βHf), which were normalized to 173Yb/171Yb = 1.13268 and 179Hf/177Hf = 0.73255 [32] with an exponential correction for mass bias. Additionally, interference of 176Yb on 176Hf was corrected by measuring the interference-free 173Yb isotope and utilizing 176Yb/173Yb = 0.79639 [32] to calculate 176Yb/177Hf. Similarly, the relatively minor interference of 176Lu on 176Hf was corrected by measuring the intensity of the interference-free 175Lu isotope and using the 176Lu/175Lu = 0.02656 [33] to estimate the 176Lu/177Hf value. Because Yb and Lu have similar physicochemical properties, the βYb value was applied to calculate the mass fractionation of Lu. The off-line processing of analytical data (including mass bias calibrations, selection of samples, and blank signals) were performed by software ICPMSDataCal [27].

3.4. Zircon Log fO2 Estimation

Chemical compositions of zircon have been used to estimate the magma oxygen fugacity [34,35,36,37]. The rare earth element (REE) Ce has two valence states (Ce3+ and Ce4+) in magmas with different partition coefficients, and Ce4+ preferentially substitutes Zr4+ in zircon. Equation (1) was derived by ref. [34] to estimate the magma log fO2 on the basis of the relationship between Ce concentration and the Ti in zircon temperature (evaluated by the equation of Ferry and Watson [37]), estimated through high P-T experiments [38,39]. In addition, Loader et al. [40] argued that CeN/CeN* (on the basis of the Nd-Sm method in zircon) is unlikely to be affected by mineral inclusions and is thus reliable. Hence, we calculated both CeN/CeN* and logfO2 from the zircon compositions to unravel the magmatic redox state. EuN* in this study is interpolated from the neighboring elements Sm and Gd, and is equal to (SmN × GdN)1/2.
Ln ( C e C e ∗ ) D =   ( 0.1156   ±   0.0050 )   ×   Ln ( f O 2 )   +   13,860   ±   708 T ( K ) − 6.125   ±   0.484
where (Ce/Ce*)D is the Ce anomaly in zircon grain, estimated from the partition coefficients, T is the absolute temperature of zircon crystallization.

3.5. Water Content Estimation

Currently, there are only a few methods for estimating magmatic H2O content, including the use of plagioclase, hornblende, zircon hygrometer and melt inclusion analysis [38,39,40,41,42,43,44]. In addition, some whole-rock element parameters, like Sr/Y and δEu values, can provide estimation of water content in PCD-forming magma [11,43,45]. Lu et al. [14] argued that zircon trace element ratios (e.g., EuN/EuN*, Dy/Yb, (Ce/Nd)/Y, and (EuN/EuN*)/Y) can serve as proxies for magmatic water content, and that PCD-fertile magmas commonly contain low Dy/Yb (<0.3) and high EuN/EuN* (>0.3) ratios. It was interpreted that “wet” magmas can suppress early plagioclase crystallization, which causes the low Dy/Yb and high EuN/EuN* ratios. However, the EuN/EuN* ratios in zircon not only vary with water content but also with the redox state [14,34,45,46,47]. Hence, in this study, (Ce/Nd)/Y and EuN/EuN* ratios are both selected as proxies for the water content of magma.

4. Results

4.1. Zircon U-Pb Age

For the zircon grains from Changdagou, CL imaging shows distinct concentric oscillatory zoning in most grains with no inherited cores. The U-Pb dating results are listed in Table 1 and illustrated in Figure 4. The Th/U ratios range from 0.32 to 1.14, distinctly higher than those of typical metamorphic zircons but resembling typical magmatic zircons [48,49]. The zircon grains yielded a weighted mean 206Pb/238U age of 214.97 ± 0.98 Ma (MSWD = 1.2, n = 30). The U-Pb ages of cores and rims of the Changdagou zircon grains are identical [50].

4.2. Zircon Trace Element Compositions

Zircon trace elements data of the Changdagou granodiorite are presented in Table 2, and the chondrite-normalized REE (Rare Earth element) patterns are shown in Figure 5. All the zircon grains are LREE (Light Rare Earth Element)-depleted and HREE (Heavy Rare Earth Element)-enriched. Concentrations of Ce and Eu are of 3.4–106 ppm and 0.14–0.75 ppm, respectively. All zircon samples show strong positive Ce anomalies (CeN/CeN* = 14 to 172) and slightly negative Eu anomalies (EuN* = 0.09 to 0.32). These characters resemble those of typical magmatic zircon [48].
The calculated logfO2 values are listed in Table A1 and plotted in Figure 6a. In the logfO2–T diagram, the Changdagou granodiorite porphyry data plot between the FMQ and MH buffers. For the data from the Pulang and Lannitang PCDs (southern Yidun arc), the Lannitang porphyry samples mainly plot above the NNO buffer, whilst half of the Pualng samples plot above the MH buffer. Therefore, the Pulang (FMQ −9.25 to +13.22) and Lannitang (FMQ +0.23 to +9.52) granites have higher logfO2 than the Changdagou granites (FMQ –3.14 to +7.44) (Figure 6b). Zircon grains of Changdgou granodiorite have relatively low Ti contents (1.51–7.04 ppm), which gave Ti-in-zircon temperatures of 628 to 757 °C (avg. 689 °C). In the logfO2–T diagram, the Changdgou granodiorite has a lower Ti-in-zircon temperature than those of the Pulang and Lannitang granites.
As shown in Figure 6c,d, Changdagou granite shows a lower and narrower range of zircon EuN/EuN* values (0.1–0.32; avg. 0.22) than those of the Lannitang (0.54–0.99; avg. 0.75) and Pulang (0.41–0.76; avg. 0.56) granites. Zircon CeN/CeN* values of the Changdagou sample (14–172; avg. 98) have a similar range with their Lannitang (22–135; avg. 73) and Pulang (3–507; avg. 143) counterparts (Table A1). Besides, it was found that the CeN/CeN* and EuN/EuN* does not have any positive relationship.
The zircon EuN/EuN* vs. (Ce/Nd)/Y diagram shows marked distinction between the Changdagou and Pulang granites (Lannitang granites not shown due to the lack of published zircon Y data). The Changdagou granites show lower zircon (Ce/Nd)/Y ratios (0.002–0.022; avg. 0.009) than their Pulang counterparts (0.007–0.18; avg. 0.038), and there is a positive correlation between EuN/EuN* and (Ce/Nd)/Y ratios (Figure 7).

4.3. Zircon Hf Isotopes

Hf-isotopic data of the zircon grains analyzed from the Changdagou granodiorite porphyry (CDG01) are shown in Table 3. Zircon GJ-1 and 91,500 was used as the reference standard, with weighted mean 176Hf/177Hf ratios of 0.282017 ± 0.0000060 and 0.282308 ± 0.0000035, respectively, determined by our routine analyses. The zircon εHf(t) values vary in a narrow range (−2.9 to −4.9; avg. −3.4), corresponding to the lower crust (Figure 8a). Comparatively, the Pulang granites have higher zircon εHf(t) values (−4.7 to 2.5; [6]), which plot above the Chondrite Uniform Reservoir (CHUR) evolutionary line in the εHf(t) vs. U-Pb age diagram (Figure 8).

5. Discussion

5.1. Geochronological Data

The age of Changdagou granite has long been estimated by its intrusive relationship with the regional stratigraphy [53]. In this study, we report the first zircon U-Pb age for the ore-forming Changdagou granodiorite porphyry (214.97 ± 0.98 Ma) from the northern Yidun arc. In the southern Yidun arc, Wang et al. [6] reported three zircon U-Pb ages (214.3 ± 2.9 Ma, 211.6 ± 3.1 Ma, and 214.1 ± 2.9 Ma) for the Pulang complex, Chen et al. [54] reported one zircon U-Pb age (216.7 ± 1.2 Ma) for the Lannitang porphyry, and Ren et al. [55] reported one zircon U-Pb age (213.4 ± 1.5 Ma) for the Xuejiping porphyry. All these ages, no matter whether from the northern or southern segment of the Yidun arc, fall consistently into the Late Triassic, coeval with the Indosinian Orogeny in SW China and mainland SE Asia. With the lithological and geochemical features of the igneous–sedimentary assemblages in the region, it is broadly accepted that the Yidun zone was a continental arc developed on the Zhongza Block [2,4]. Thus, formation of the Changdagou granodiorite porphyry was probably related to the subduction associated with Late Triassic magmatism in the Yidun zone [23,56,57].

5.2. Magma Redox State

It is generally accepted that oxidized magmas are favorable to the formation of PCDs, via inhibiting early sulfide precipitation and allowing the ore metals to be concentrated into the residual melt and hydrothermal fluids [11,58,59,60]. Shen et al. [58] argued that the oxygen fugacity has a positive relationship with the size of PCDs in the CAOB, and that the (NNO + 2) values can distinguish large and intermediate PCDs from small ones. In this study, the average magmatic oxygen fugacity (FMQ +3.98) and CeN/CeN* (98) for the Changdagou granodiorite are much higher than the lowest limit (FMQ + 1.5) for porphyry Cu–(Au)–Mo mineralization [61,62,63]. These data suggest that Changdagou granodiorite has PCD-forming potential. Meanwhile, the Pulang and Lannitang granites both contain higher logfO2 values than those of the Changdagou granodiorite (Figure 6a,b), which may explain why the PCDs at Pulang (1.14 Mt) and Lannitang (0.30 Mt for Xuejiping) are larger than that at Changdagou [7].

5.3. Magma Water Content

High magmatic water contents are widely accepted to be important in enhancing the magma PCD fertility [38,39,41,59,60,61,62,63]. Lu et al. [14] suggested that the fertile magmas commonly contain high (Ce/Nd)/Y and high EuN/EuN* ratios. However, EuN/EuN* of zircon grain is also dependent on the magma oxidation state [5,31,40,46]. In this study, the lack of positive CeN/CeN* vs. EuN/EuN* correlation, and the presence of positive EuN/EuN* vs. (Ce/Nd)/Y correlation suggest that EuN/EuN* is probably affected by water content (Figure 6c and Figure 7a). The Changdagou granodiorite porphyry has a narrower and lower EuN/EuN* zircon grain range than those of the Lannitang and Pulang granites, which suggest that the latter two have higher magmatic water contents.

5.4. Tectono-Metallogenic Implications on the Northern and Southern Yidun Arc

It has been generally believed that high oxidization of arc magmas are related to subduction: the closer the distance of the arc magmas from the subduction zone, the higher the oxygen fugacity [10,12,37,43,64,65,66]. This is likely caused by the larger amount of oxidized ions (i.e., Fe3+, Mn4+, S6+, and C4+) carried by the slab-derived fluids closer to the subduction front [10,67,68,69,70]. In this study, we suggest that ore-forming magmas at Lannitang and Pulang (southern Yidun arc) have had higher water content and oxygen fugacity than those at Changdaou (northern Yidun arc), which implies that the southern Yidun arc was closer to the Ganzi-Litang subduction zone. A similar conclusion was also reached by Wang et al. [6].
In contrast with Lu, Hf partitions into silicate melts more efficiently, melts derived from the magma would become less radiogenic (lower 176Lu/176Hf) and thus have lower 176Hf/177Hf ratios relative to the residue [54,71]. Regional intrusions sourced from the continental crust generally possess low εHf(t) values, such as Hongshan quartz monzonite [6]. The Changdagou sample plot is close to the chondrite line and presents variations in εHf(t) values (Figure 8a,b). It is arranged with the coeval Late Triassic intrusions in the Songpan-Ganzi terrane [72].
As shown in Figure 9, most of the Late Triassic intrusions in the southern Yidun arc, including the Xuejiping, Pulang, Lannitang, and Songnuo intrusions, are PCD-forming, but coeval granites in the northern Yidun arc are mostly ore-barren, such as the Daocheng and Cuojiaoma intrusions [3]. These infertile rocks show a wide range of negative εHf(t) values, indicating a mixed source dominated by crustal components [73,74]. Unlike most other Late Triassic intrusions in the northern Yidun arc, the εHf(t) values of Changdagou granodiorite porphyry presents a narrow range which cluster around 0, indicating a more mantle-derived source. The decreasing εHf(t) trend from south to north (and reverses sharply around Changdagou) in the Yidun arc probably indicate decreasing mantle-derived input to the granitoid formation from south to north, which may be attributed to the shape of the continental arc and/or subduction angle variation [3,4,6].

6. Conclusions

1. Zircon U-Pb dating of the Changdagou granodiorite porphyry in the northern Yidun arc yielded 214.97 ± 0.98 Ma. This age is very similar to other Late Triassic PCD-forming magmatisms in the Yidun arc.
2. As reflected by proxies such as logfO2, EuN/EuN*, and (Ce/Nd)/Y, magmas that formed the Changdagou granodiorite porphyry may have had high oxygen fugacity (FMQ + 3.98) and water content, yet they were likely lower than those of the Pulang and Langnitang ore-causative porphyries. This may have limited the PCD size at Changdagou.
3. The southern segment of the Yidun arc was probably closer to the subduction front than the northern segment, where Changdagou is located. The more subduction-distal setting of the northern Yidun arc may have resulted in the lower oxygen fugacity, water content, enriched-mantle input, and thus the PCD-fertility there.

Author Contributions

X.-Y.L. and H.S. conceived and designed the experiments; X.-Y.L. performed the experiments; J.-R.Z. and X.-Y.L. analyzed the data; X.-Y.L. wrote the paper, assisted by all other authors; and C.-K.L. revised the paper.

Funding

This research was funded by the NSFC-China (418030401 and 41802251), the Geological Survey of China (1212011220391), and the China Scholarship Council Fund (201406380063).

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Wei Gao for helping with the LA-ICP-MS analyses. Also, we appreciate the constructive comments and suggestions by the editor and three anonymous reviewers, with which the paper was greatly improved.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table
Table A1. Crystallization temperatures, Eu and Ce anomalies, and magma oxygen fugacity of zircon grains from Changdagou, Pulang, and Lannitang granites.
Table A1. Crystallization temperatures, Eu and Ce anomalies, and magma oxygen fugacity of zircon grains from Changdagou, Pulang, and Lannitang granites.
Spot. NoT (Ti in Zircon)CeN/CeN*logfO2δFMQEuN/EuN*Ce/Nd/Y
Changdagou Granite
CDG01-01757104−9.926.290.180.00744
CDG01-0272753−14.0130.260.00233
CDG01-03675116−13.884.620.210.00788
CDG01-0467837−18.060.350.090.00373
CDG01-05709114−12.035.460.230.01207
CDG01-0669754−15.52.340.220.00247
CDG01-07657124−14.684.370.20.01158
CDG01-08676133−13.285.170.220.00877
CDG01-09708132−11.535.980.210.00838
CDG01-10650107−15.643.620.220.01149
CDG01-1172184−12.564.610.090.00176
CDG01-12701111−12.65.140.320.01198
CDG01-1370592−13.14.520.180.00795
CDG01-14668150−13.295.410.250.01111
CDG01-15735163−9.347.440.260.01429
CDG01-16698172−11.16.720.260.02233
CDG01-1770559−14.722.880.210.00482
CDG01-1868586−14.423.760.260.01078
CDG01-1970785−13.274.290.260.00766
CDG01-20698107−12.884.930.240.00706
CDG01-2167388−15.043.510.140.01289
CDG01-2268014−21.48−3.140.220.00335
CDG01-2365793−15.773.280.20.01239
CDG01-24628143−15.954.050.220.00933
CDG01-2566140−18.720.190.260.00456
CDG01-2672490−12.134.960.250.00472
CDG01-27692116−12.915.080.290.01205
CDG01-2867881−15.073.330.20.00615
CDG01-29646102−16.13.310.180.01455
CDG01-3069687−13.754.10.150.00681
Pulang Complex
PL1710469−6.869.720.680.031762
PL2907168−1.8310.580.610.030845
PL3762117−9.395.940.650.031273
PL4712- 0.580.04695
PL573938−14.751.120.60.026624
PL6598- 0.650.036933
PL765818−22.12−4.150.620.02585
PL8701507−7.019.780.550.036627
PL976877−10.674.510.720.055079
PL10687- 0.790.042448
PL1174472−12.143.610.670.036617
PL012656170−13.714.310.740.052305
PL013701- 0.720.055537
PL1467687−15.092.380.760.038616
PL156811586−3.8713.460.610.03808
PL16692262−10.027.020.650.045514
PL1771963−13.922.430.560.033955
PL18735189−8.957.020.530.050858
PL19745178−8.667.060.630.036346
PL2056071−23.48−2.430.620.057586
PL2169234−17.69−0.650.680.016862
PL2267950−16.970.410.720.035223
PL23679115−13.813.560.560.01685
PL024703181−10.795.960.540.180001
PL02176198−10.15.240.640.04412
PL022685- 0.590.033711
PL0237624−22.14−6.810.590.007535
PL024719241−8.847.50.540.039809
PL02575281−11.264.30.570.014062
PL026692118−13.034.010.590.043575
PL02771933−16.280.060.590.037696
PL028762184−7.77.630.620.031683
PL02974779−11.644.030.560.032735
PL-S21063028−22.03−3.270.530.013966
PL-S11660116−14.9130.60.018867
PL-S12730214−8.717.360.480.041371
PL-S13673339−10.137.420.610.04972
PL-S14666- 0.650.041221
PL-S15766125−8.966.270.650.049746
PL-S1668685−14.562.620.640.061066
PL-S17753- 0.360.08668
PL-S18706198−10.316.370.480.053921
PL-S196591792−4.7113.230.630.045295
PL-S206604−27.36−9.450.550.015036
PL-S21680- 0.670.039204
PL-S227193−25.61−9.250.60.008073
PL-S23676141−13.284.190.660.03328
PL-S2473162−13.332.710.70.026698
PL031731- 0.660.032214
PL032696157−11.525.410.550.050453
PL033724102−11.614.60.510.025244
PL034737- 0.50.03888
PL03569241−16.810.220.50.037543
PL036727288−7.68.560.50.034121
PL037764277−5.99.390.640.03397
PL038737178−8.857.050.430.026517
PL039739- 0.50.053342
PL0310735154−9.526.440.540.04403
PL031170281−13.693.090.490.031541
PL0312697308−8.937.970.480.045628
PL031366260−17.110.730.460.062515
PL031466890−15.262.440.520.006801
PL0315722152−10.216.050.470.036551
PL0316699228−9.986.890.550.035842
PL031776523−15.150.10.510.01347
PL031870944−15.6110.410.025461
PL0319710254−8.947.630.510.033803
PL0320702153−11.275.50.540.023279
PL032169145−16.450.610.540.042942
PL032273183−12.083.980.560.032442
Lannitang Granite
LN7-2789112−8.147.280.77
182787−7.377.140.67
2856135−4.519.380.72
3100156−2.548.580.54
479083−9.26.180.77
579143−11.673.690.66
6798122−7.387.810.86
778494−96.520.61
879228−13.222.110.69
9758116−9.496.70.95
LN140176430−14.261.750.72
178862−10.425.010.75
2829108−6.487.990.74
374352−13.223.330.64
475443−13.412.880.73
579765−9.85.40.89
697239−4.876.750.95
781422−13.121.680.67
874184−11.515.10.61
960883−19.321.370.99
Notes: 1 Temperatures were calculated with a Ti-in-zircon thermometer [37]. 2 Oxygen fugacities ware calculated by the method proposed by [34]. 3 EuN/EuN* = EuN/SQRT(SmN*GdN), where subscript N refers to Chondrite normalized with the date of Sun and McDonough [48]. 4 Trace elements data from [5] for Pulang complex and Yu et al. [75] for Lannitang granite.

References

  1. Deng, J.; Wang, Q.F.; Li, G.J.; Li, C.S.; Wang, C.M. Tethys tectonic evolution and its bearing on the distribution of important mineral deposits in the Sanjiang region, SW China. Gondwana Res. 2017, 26, 419–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Roger, F.; Jolivet, M.; Malavieille, J. The tectonic evolution of the Songpan-Garzê (North Tibet) and adjacent areas from Proterozoic to Present: A synthesis. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2010, 39, 254–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Wang, P.; Dong, G.C.; Santosh, M.; Li, X.F.; Dong, M.L. Triassic ore-bearing and barren porphyries in the Zhongdian arc of SW China: Implications for the subduction of the Paleo-Tethys Ocean. Int. Geol. Rev. 2017, 59, 1490–1505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Wang, P.; Dong, G.C.; Dong, M.L.; Li, Y.P.; Xu, Y.M.; Pan, Y.N.; Chen, W.; Wu, Z.C. Magma mixing of the Cuojiaoma batholith in the Yidun Arc: Evidence from mafic microgranular enclaves. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2017, 33, 2535–2547. [Google Scholar]
  5. Meng, X.Y.; Mao, J.W.; Zhang, C.Q.; Zhang, D.Y.; Liu, H. Melt recharge, fO2-T conditions, and metal fertility of felsic magmas: Zircon trace element chemistry of Cu-Au porphyries in the Sanjiang orogenic belt, southwest China. Miner. Depos. 2018, 53, 649–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Wang, P.; Dong, G.C.; Zhao, G.C. Petrogenesis of the Pulang Porphyry Complex, Southwestern China: Implications for Porphyry Copper Metallogenesis and Subduction of the Paleo-Tethys Oceanic Lithosphere. Lithos 2018, 304–307, 280–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Gao, X.; Yang, L.Q.; Evan, A.O. The lithospheric architecture of two subterranes in the eastern Yidun Terrane, East Tethys: Insights from Hf–Nd isotopic mapping. Gondwana Res. 2018, 62, 127–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zhang, X.; Wang, J. Zircon U-Pb dating and geochemistry of the Changdagou pluton in northwestern Sichuan Province. Acta Mineral. Sin. 2015, 35, 745–746, (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
  9. Blevin, P.L. Redox and compositional parameters for interpreting the granitoid metallogeny of eastern Australia: Implications for gold-rich ore systems. Resour. Geol. 2004, 54, 241–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Annen, C.; Blundy, J.; Sparks, R. The genesis of intermediate and silicic magmas in deep crustal hot zones. J. Petrol. 2006, 47, 505–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Loucks, R.R. Distinctive composition of copper-ore-forming arc mag-mas: Australian. J. Earth Sci. 2014, 61, 5–16. [Google Scholar]
  12. Dilles, J.H.; Kent, A.J.; Wooden, J.L.; Tosdal, R.M.; Koleszar, A.; Lee, R.G.; Farmer, L.P. Zircon compositional evidence for sulfur-degassing from ore-forming arc magmas. Econ. Geol. 2015, 110, 241–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Ding, T.; Ma, D.S.; Lu, J.J.; Zhang, R.Q. Apatite in granitoids related to polymetallic mineral deposits in southeastern Hunan Province, Shi–Hang zone, China: Implications for petrogenesis and metallogenesis. Ore Geol. Rev. 2015, 69, 104–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Lu, Y.J.; Loucks, R.R.; Fiorentini, M.; Mccuaig, T.C.; Evans, N.J.; Yang, Z.M.; Hou, Z.Q.; Kirkland, C.L.; Parra-Avila, L.A.; Kobussen, A.; et al. Chapter 13 Zircon Compositions as a Pathfinder for Porphyry Cu ± Mo ± Au Deposits. Econ. Geol. 2016, 19, 329–347. [Google Scholar]
  15. Ballard, J.R.; Palin, M.J.; Campbell, I.H. Relative oxidation states of magmas inferred from Ce (IV)/Ce (III) in zircon: Application to porphyry copper deposits of northern Chile. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 2002, 144, 347–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. He, D.F.; Zhu, W.G.; Zhong, H.; Ren, T.; Bai, Z.J.; Fan, H.P. Zircon U-Pb geochronology and elemental and Sr-Nd-Hf isotopic geochemistry of the Daocheng granitic pluton from the Yidun Arc, SW China. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2013, 67–68, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. He, M.; Zheng, H.; Clift, P.D. Zircon U–Pb geochronology and Hf isotope data from the Yangtze River sands: Implications for major magmatic events and crustal evolution in Central China. Chem. Geol. 2013, 360–361, 186–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Guitreau, M.; Blichert-Toft, J.; Martin, H.; Mojzsis, S.J.; Albarède, F. Hafnium isotope evidence from Archean granitic rocks for deep-mantle origin of continental crust. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2012, 337–338, 211–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Li, W.C.; Zeng, P.S.; Hou, Z.Q.; Noel, C.W. The Pulang porphyry copper deposit and associated felsic intrusions in Yunnan Province, Southwest China. Econ. Geol. 2011, 106, 79–92. [Google Scholar]
  20. Hu, R.Z.; Zhou, M.F. Multiple Mesozoic mineralization events in South China—An introduction to the thematic issue. Miner. Depos. 2012, 47, 579–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Xiao, L.; He, Q.; Pirajno, F.; Ni, P.; Du, J.X.; Wei, Q.R. Possible correlation between a mantle plume and the evolution of Paleo-Tethys Jinshajiang Ocean: Evidence from a volcanic rifted margin in the Xiaru-Tuoding area, Yunnan, SW China. Lithos 2008, 100, 112–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Song, H.; Zhang, C.J.; Li, Y.G.; Zhong, W.L.; Li, J.Q. Geochemical constraints of trace elements on ore-forming fluids in the copper polymetallic deposits in the middle Sanjiang Belts. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2016, 32, 804–814, (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
  23. Peng, T.; Zhao, G.; Fan, W.; Peng, B.; Mao, Y. Zircon geochronology and Hf isotopes of Mesozoic intrusive rocks from the Yidun terrane, Eastern Tibetan Plateau: Petrogenesis and their bearings with Cu mineralization. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2014, 80, 18–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Leng, C.B.; Zhang, X.C.; Hu, R.Z.; Wang, S.X.; Zhong, H.; Wang, W.Q.; Bi, X.W. Zircon U-Pb and molybdenite Re-Os geochronology and Sr-Nd-Pb-Hf isotopic constraints on the genesis of the Xuejiping porphyry copper deposit in Zhongdian, Northwest Yunnan, China. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2012, 60, 31–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Leng, C.B.; Huang, Q.Y.; Zhang, X.C.; Wang, S.C.; Zhong, H.; Hu, R.Z.; Bi, X.W.; Zhu, J.J.; Wang, X.S. Petrogenesis of the Late Triassic volcanic rocks in the Southern Yidun arc, SW China: Constraints from the geochronology, geochemistry and Sr-Nd-Pb-Hf isotopes. Lithos 2014, 190–191, 363–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zong, K.Q.; Klemd, R.; Yuan, Y.; He, Z.Y.; Guo, J.L.; Shi, X.L.; Liu, Y.S.; Hu, Z.C.; Zhang, Z.M. The assembly of Rodinia: The correlation of early Neoproterozoic (ca. 900 Ma) high-grade metamorphism and continental arc formation in the southern Beishan Orogen, southern Central Asian Orogenic Belt (CAOB). Precambrian Res. 2017, 290, 32–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hu, Z.C.; Zhang, W.; Liu, Y.S.; Gao, S.; Li, M.; Zong, K.Q.; Chen, H.H.; Hu, S.H. “Wave” signal smoothing and mercury removing device for laser ablation quadrupole and multiple collector ICP-MS analysis: Application to lead isotope analysis. Anal. Chem. 2015, 87, 1152–1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Liu, Y.S.; Gao, S.; Hu, Z.C.; Gao, C.G.; Zong, K.Q.; Wang, D.B. Continental and oceanic crust recycling-induced melt-peridotite interactions in the Trans-North China Orogen: U-Pb dating, Hf isotopes and trace elements in zircons of mantle xenoliths. J. Petrol. 2010, 51, 537–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Liu, Y.S.; Hu, Z.C.; Gao, S.; Günther, D.; Xu, J.; Gao, C.G.; Chen, H.H. In situ analysis of major and trace elements of anhydrous minerals by LA-ICP-MS without applying an internal standard. Chem. Geol. 2008, 257, 34–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ludwig, K.R. ISOPLOT 3.00: A Geochronological Toolkit for Microsoft Excel; Berkeley Geochronology Center: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  31. Woodhead, J.D.; Hergt, J.M.; Shelley, M.; Eggins, S.; Kemp, R. Zircon Hf-isotope analysis with an excimer laser, depth profiling, ablation of complex geometries, and concomitant age estimation. Chem. Geol. 2004, 209, 121–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Fisher, C.M.; Vervoort, J.D.; Hanchar, J.M. Guidelines for reporting zircon Hf isotopic data by LA-MC-ICPMS and potential pitfalls in the interpretation of these data. Chem. Geol. 2014, 363, 125–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Blichert-Toft, J.; Chauvel, C.; Albarede, F. Separation of Hf and Lu for high-precision isotope analysis of rock samples by magnetic sector-multiple collector ICP–MS. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1997, 127, 248–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Trail, D.; Watson, E.B.; Tailby, N.D. Ce and Eu anomalies in zircon as proxies for the oxidation state of magmas. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2012, 97, 70–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Smythe, D.J.; Brenan, J.M. Cerium oxidation state in silicate melts: Combined fO2, temperature and compositional effects. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2015, 170, 173–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Smythe, D.J.; Brenan, J.M. Magmatic oxygen fugacity estimated using zircon melt partitioning of cerium. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2016, 453, 260–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Ferry, J.M.; Watson, E.B. New thermodynamic models and revised calibrations for the Ti-in-zircon and Zr-in-rutile thermometers. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 2007, 154, 429–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Qiu, J.T.; Yu, X.Q.; Santosh, M.; Zhang, D.H.; Chen, S.Q.; Li, P.J. Geochronology and magmatic oxygen fugacity of the Tongcun molybdenum deposit, northwest Zhejiang, SE China. Miner. Depos. 2013, 48, 545–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Qiu, J.T.; Yu, X.Q.; Santosh, M.; Li, P.J.; Zhang, D.H.; Xiong, G.Q.; Zhang, B.Y. The Late Mesozoic tectonic evolution and magmatic history of west Zhejiang, SE China: Implications for regional metallogeny. Int. J. Earth Sci. 2014, 103, 713–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Loader, M.A.; Wilkinson, J.J.; Armstrong, R.N. The effect of titanite crystallization on Eu and Ce anomalies in zircon and its implications for the assessment of porphyry Cu deposit fertility. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2017, 472, 107–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Thomas, R. Determination of water contents of granite melt inclusions by confocal laser Raman microprobe spectroscopy. Am. Mineral. 2000, 85, 868–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Thomas, R.; Davidson, P. Water in granite and pegmatite-forming melts. Ore Geol. Rev. 2012, 46, 32–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Williamson, B.J.; Herrington, R.J.; Morris, A. Porphyry copper enrichment linked to excess aluminum in plagioclase. Nat. Geosci. 2015, 9, 237–241. [Google Scholar]
  44. Burnham, C.W. Water and magmas; A mixing model. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1975, 39, 1077–1084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Liang, H.Y.; Sun, W.D.; Su, W.C.; Zartman, R.E. Porphyry copper-gold mineralization at Yulong, China, promoted by decreasing redox potential during magnetite alteration. Econ. Geol. 2009, 104, 587–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Zhang, W.; Lentz, D.R.; Thorne, K.G.; McFarlane, C. Geochemical characteristics of biotite from felsic intrusive rocks around the Sisson Brook W–Mo–Cu deposit, west-central New Brunswick: An indicator of halogen and oxygen fugacity of magmatic systems. Ore Geol. Rev. 2016, 77, 82–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Zhang, J.R.; Li, X.Y.; Ye, M. Research progress on Ce anomaly method for calculating oxygen fugacity of granite and applicability. Chin. Rare Earths 2018, 39, 20–27, (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
  48. Belousova, E.A.; Griffin, W.L.; Reilly, S.Y. Igneous zircon: Trace element composition as an indicator of source rock type. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 2002, 143, 602–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Hoskin, P.W.O.; Schaltegger, U. The composition of zircon and igneous and metamorphic petrogenesis. Rev. Miner. Geochem. 2003, 53, 27–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zeng, Y.F. The Geological Characteristics and Discussions on the Genesis of Porphyry Copper Deposit in Changdagou. Master’s Thesis, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, China, 2015; 62p. (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
  51. Blichert-Toft, J.; Albarede, F. The Lu–Hf isotope geochemistry of chondrites and the evolution of the mantle–crust system. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1997, 148, 243–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Griffin, W.L.; Pearson, N.J.; Belousova, E.; Jackson, S.E.; van Achterbergh, E.; O’Reilly, S.Y.; Shee, S.R. The Hf isotope composition of cratonic mantle: LAM-MC-ICPMS analysis of zircon megacrysts in kimberlites. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2000, 64, 133–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Li, S.R.; Yang, X.G.; Cheng, D.G.; Guo, P. Metallogenic regularity and prospecting potential of manganese deposits in Sichuan. Acta Geol. Sichuan 2012, 32, 21–25, (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
  54. Chen, J.L.; Xu, J.F.; Ren, J.B.; Huang, X.X.; Wang, B.D. Geochronology and geochemical characteristics of late Triassic porphyritic rocks from the Zhongdian arc, eastern Tibet, and their tectonic and metallogenic implications. Gondwana Res. 2014, 26, 492–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Ren, J.B.; Xu, J.F.; Chen, J.L. Zircon geochronology and geological implications of ore–bearing porphyries from Zhongdian arc. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2011, 27, 2591–2599, (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
  56. Reid, A.J.; Wilson, C.J.L.; Liu, S. Structural evidence for the Permo-Triassic tectonic evolution of the Yidun Arc, eastern Tibetan Plateau. J. Struct. Geol. 2005, 27, 119–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Reid, A.J.; Wilson, C.J.L.; Shun, L.; Pearson, N.; Belousova, E. Mesozoic plutons of the Yidun Arc, SW China: U/Pb geochronology and Hf isotopic signature. Ore Geol. Rev. 2007, 31, 88–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Shen, P.; Hattori, K.; Pan, H.; Jackson, S.; Seitmuratova, E. Oxidation condition and metal fertility of granitic magmas: Zircon trace-element data from porphyry Cu deposits in the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Econ. Geol. 2015, 110, 1861–1878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Sun, W.D.; Liang, H.Y.; Ling, M.X.; Zhan, M.Z.; Ding, X.; Zhang, H.; Yang, X.Y.; Li, Y.L.; Ireland, T.R.; Wei, Q.R. The link between reduced porphyry copper deposits and oxidized magmas. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2013, 103, 263–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Sun, W.D.; Huang, R.F.; Li, H.; Hu, Y.B.; Zhang, C.C.; Sun, S.J.; Zhang, L.P.; Ding, X.; Li, C.Y.; Zartman, R.E. Porphyry deposits and oxidized magmas. Ore Geol. Rev. 2015, 65, 97–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Jugo, P.; Candela, P.; Piccoli, P. Magmatic sulfides and Au: Cu ratios in porphyry deposits: An experimental study of copper and gold partitioning at 850 °C, 100 MPa in a haplogranitic melt–pyrrhotite–intermediate solid solution–gold metal assemblage, at gas saturation. Lithos 1999, 46, 573–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Mungall, J.E. Roasting the mantle: Slab melting and the genesis of major Au and Au- rich Cu deposits. Geology 2002, 30, 915–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Mungall, J.E.; Brenan, J.M. Partitioning of platinum-group elements and Au between sulfide liquid and basalt and the origins of mantle–crust fractionation of the chalcophile. Chem. Geol. 2014, 120, 223–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Nicholls, J. A simple thermodynamic model for estimating the solubility of H2O in magmas. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1980, 74, 211–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Sillitoe, R.H. Porphyry copper systems. Econ. Geol. 2010, 105, 3–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Wang, R.; Richards, J.P.; Hou, Z.-Q.; Yang, Z.-M.; Gou, Z.-B.; DuFrane, S.A. Increasing magmatic oxidation state from Paleocene to Miocene in the eastern Gangdese Belt, Tibet: Implication for collision-related porphyry Cu-Mo ± Au mineralization. Econ. Geol. 2014, 109, 1943–1965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Wang, R.; Richards, J.P.; Hou, Z.; Yang, Z.; DuFrane, S.A. Increased Magmatic Water Content—The Key to Oligo-Miocene Porphyry Cu-Mo ± Au Formation in the Eastern Gangdese Belt, Tibet. Econ. Geol. 2014, 109, 1315–1339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Wang, F.Y.; Ling, M.X.; Ding, X.; Hu, Y.H.; Zhou, J.B.; Yang, X.Y.; Liang, H.Y.; Fan, W.M.; Sun, W. Mesozoic large magmatic events and mineralization in SE China: Oblique subduction of the Pacific plate. Int. Geol. Rev. 2011, 53, 704–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Yavuz, F. Evaluating micas in petrologic and metallogenic aspect: I—Definitions and structure of the computer program MICA+. Comput. Geosci. 2003, 29, 1203–1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Yavuz, F. Evaluating micas in petrologic and metallogenic aspect: Part II—Applications using the computer program Mica+. Comput. Geosci. 2003, 29, 1215–1228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Richards, J.P. The oxidation state, and sulfur and Cu contents of arc magmas: Implications for metallogeny. Lithos 2015, 233, 27–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Cai, H.M.; Zhang, H.F.; Xu, W.C.; Shi, Z.L.; Yuan, H.L. Petrogenesis of Indosinian volcanic rocks in Songpan-Garze fold belt of the northeastern Tibetan Plateau: New evidence for lithospheric delamination. China Earth Sci. 2010, 53, 1316–1328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Hou, Z.Q.; Gao, Y.F.; Qu, X.M.; Rui, Z.Y.; Mo, X.X. Origin of adakitic intrusions generated during mid-Miocene east-west extension in southern Tibet. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2004, 220, 139–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Hou, Z.Q.; Zheng, Y.C.; Yang, Z.M.; Rui, Z.Y.; Zhao, Z.D.; Jiang, S.H.; Qu, X.M.; Sun, Q.Z. Contribution of mantle components within juvenile lower-crust to collisional zone porphyry Cu systems in Tibet. Miner. Depos. 2013, 48, 173–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Yu, Y.F.; Fei, G.C.; Li, Y.G.; Long, X.R.; Tian, E.Y.; Liu, G.Q.; Lv, F.M.; Hua, K.Q. Oxygen Fugacity Characteristics and Metallogenic Significance of Porphyry Copper Deposit in Zhongdian Island. Chin. Rare Earths 2018, 39, 20–27, (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
Minerals 09 00337 g001 550
Figure 1. (a) Tectonic framework and distribution of major geological terranes and sutures of mainland SE Asia; (b) Tectonic framework of the Sanjiang Region, including the major geological terranes, sutures, volcanic rocks and intrusions (modified after [6]).
Figure 1. (a) Tectonic framework and distribution of major geological terranes and sutures of mainland SE Asia; (b) Tectonic framework of the Sanjiang Region, including the major geological terranes, sutures, volcanic rocks and intrusions (modified after [6]).
Minerals 09 00337 g001
Minerals 09 00337 g002 550
Figure 2. (a) Simplified geologic map of the Changdagou deposit (modified from [6]). (b) Geological profile for prospecting line No. 12.
Figure 2. (a) Simplified geologic map of the Changdagou deposit (modified from [6]). (b) Geological profile for prospecting line No. 12.
Minerals 09 00337 g002
Minerals 09 00337 g003 550
Figure 3. Cathodoluminescence (CL) images of zircons from the Changdagou granodiorite porphyry (sample CDG-01). The larger yellow circles represent locations of Hf isotopic analyses, whereas the smaller red circles indicate spots of LA-ICP-MS U-Pb dating. LA-ICP-MS = laser ablation-inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry.
Figure 3. Cathodoluminescence (CL) images of zircons from the Changdagou granodiorite porphyry (sample CDG-01). The larger yellow circles represent locations of Hf isotopic analyses, whereas the smaller red circles indicate spots of LA-ICP-MS U-Pb dating. LA-ICP-MS = laser ablation-inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry.
Minerals 09 00337 g003
Minerals 09 00337 g004 550
Figure 4. Zircon U-Pb Concordia and 206Pb/238Pb weighted mean age diagrams for the Changdagou granodiorite porphyry.
Figure 4. Zircon U-Pb Concordia and 206Pb/238Pb weighted mean age diagrams for the Changdagou granodiorite porphyry.
Minerals 09 00337 g004
Minerals 09 00337 g005 550
Figure 5. Chondrite-normalized REE diagram of zircon grains from the Changdagou granodiorite porphyry. Normalizing values from [48,49].
Figure 5. Chondrite-normalized REE diagram of zircon grains from the Changdagou granodiorite porphyry. Normalizing values from [48,49].
Minerals 09 00337 g005
Minerals 09 00337 g006 550
Figure 6. CeN/CeN*-related binary diagrams of zircon grains for the Changdagou, Pulang and Lannitang granites from Yidun arc. (a) logfO2 vs. temp. °C diagram, where logfO2 value was calculated by the method of Trail et al. [34]; (b) Histogram of oxygen fugacity; (c) CeN/CeN* vs. EuN/EuN* plot, where CeN* is calculated by fitting method; (d) Histogram of 1000 (EuN/EuN*) vs. Data are as listed in Table A1.
Figure 6. CeN/CeN*-related binary diagrams of zircon grains for the Changdagou, Pulang and Lannitang granites from Yidun arc. (a) logfO2 vs. temp. °C diagram, where logfO2 value was calculated by the method of Trail et al. [34]; (b) Histogram of oxygen fugacity; (c) CeN/CeN* vs. EuN/EuN* plot, where CeN* is calculated by fitting method; (d) Histogram of 1000 (EuN/EuN*) vs. Data are as listed in Table A1.
Minerals 09 00337 g006
Minerals 09 00337 g007 550
Figure 7. (a) (Ce/Nd)/Y vs. EuN/EuN* diagram of zircon grains for the Changdagou and Pulang porphyries; (b) histogram of (Ce/Nd)/Y values.
Figure 7. (a) (Ce/Nd)/Y vs. EuN/EuN* diagram of zircon grains for the Changdagou and Pulang porphyries; (b) histogram of (Ce/Nd)/Y values.
Minerals 09 00337 g007
Minerals 09 00337 g008 550
Figure 8. (a) Diagram of εHf(t) vs. U-Pb ages. (b) Histogram of εHf(t) values.
Figure 8. (a) Diagram of εHf(t) vs. U-Pb ages. (b) Histogram of εHf(t) values.
Minerals 09 00337 g008
Minerals 09 00337 g009 550
Figure 9. Diagram of εHf(t) vs. latitude to illustrate the contribution of mantle components for the ore-fertile granites from north to south in the Yidun arc. The data are from refs. [4,6]. Abbreviations: CDG—Changdagou; SCM—Sucuoma; AJSD—Ajisenduo; JDC—Jiaduocuo; CJM—Cuojiama; LNT—Lannitang; PL—Pulang; SM—Shenmu; SN—Songnuo; XJP—Xuejiping; DC—Daocheng.
Figure 9. Diagram of εHf(t) vs. latitude to illustrate the contribution of mantle components for the ore-fertile granites from north to south in the Yidun arc. The data are from refs. [4,6]. Abbreviations: CDG—Changdagou; SCM—Sucuoma; AJSD—Ajisenduo; JDC—Jiaduocuo; CJM—Cuojiama; LNT—Lannitang; PL—Pulang; SM—Shenmu; SN—Songnuo; XJP—Xuejiping; DC—Daocheng.
Minerals 09 00337 g009
Table
Table 1. U-Pb isotopic compositions and ages of zircon grains from Changdagou granodiorite porphyry.
Table 1. U-Pb isotopic compositions and ages of zircon grains from Changdagou granodiorite porphyry.
Element Composition (ppm)Isotopic Element RatioIsotopic Ages (Ma)
ThUTh/U207Pb/235U206Pb/238U207Pb/235U206Pb/238U
Samples Ratio1σRatio1σAge1σAge1σ
CDG01-013005770.520.2555960.0083840.0341110.000382231.16.8216.22.4
CDG01-025477390.740.2307970.0069180.0332330.000315210.95.7210.82.0
CDG01-034007440.540.2309560.0075540.0336180.000356211.06.2213.22.2
CDG01-043009300.320.2313040.0069040.0338560.000468211.35.7214.62.9
CDG01-052114600.460.2478130.0090770.0341240.000352224.87.4216.32.2
CDG01-063856290.610.2343340.0071780.0344730.000414213.85.9218.52.6
CDG01-072264450.510.2438630.0086340.0334030.000311221.67.0211.81.9
CDG01-084926840.720.2455320.0073820.0336340.000344222.96.0213.32.1
CDG01-09122210691.140.2199640.0065780.0310910.000292201.95.5197.41.8
CDG01-102565080.500.2389070.0086820.0338180.000345217.57.1214.42.2
CDG01-114167140.580.2469250.0077030.0337630.000363224.16.3214.12.3
CDG01-121764280.410.2500220.0092530.0343070.000432226.67.5217.42.7
CDG01-131944840.400.2327750.0093520.0336100.000396212.57.7213.12.5
CDG01-144837660.630.2542020.0088570.0344080.000438230.07.2218.12.7
CDG01-152114550.460.2432160.0087800.0343360.000414221.17.2217.62.6
CDG01-161313490.380.2395770.0091040.0339130.000403218.17.5215.02.5
CDG01-172715010.540.2439900.0094310.0337040.000407221.77.7213.72.5
CDG01-181072800.380.2507180.0116930.0339090.000412227.29.5215.02.6
CDG01-193247520.430.2622680.0087430.0349510.000402236.57.0221.52.5
CDG01-202405220.460.2202260.0083930.0345210.000392202.17.0218.82.4
CDG01-211132830.400.2284620.0090280.0338380.000419208.97.5214.52.6
CDG01-222294700.490.2385350.0088110.0338460.000376217.27.2214.62.3
CDG01-231513880.390.2269450.0079360.0339750.000434207.76.6215.42.7
CDG01-242294700.490.2210800.0074900.0334380.000349202.86.2212.02.2
CDG01-251803570.500.2442260.0083810.0340590.000382221.96.8215.92.4
CDG01-262534420.570.2341940.0092420.0334980.000375213.77.6212.42.3
CDG01-271784230.420.2454660.0099400.0338920.000364222.98.1214.92.3
CDG01-282815760.490.2415920.0078130.0344670.000325219.76.4218.42.0
CDG01-291563290.470.2284880.0096590.0344690.000460208.98.0218.52.9
CDG01-301924650.410.2364860.0077280.0335210.000318215.56.3212.52.0
GJ-19.433070.030.76440.02550.09840.001157714.656056.59
GJ-19.373080.030.79940.02510.09690.001159614.195966.30
GJ-19.642970.030.81830.02130.09780.001060711.916025.97
GJ-19.862980.030.80090.02230.09680.001059712.595965.75
GJ-19.412970.030.77970.02340.09760.001158513.356006.75
GJ-19.573020.030.79830.02410.09680.001159613.595966.32
GJ-19.662980.030.83220.02170.09780.001061512.026015.95
GJ-19.582990.030.79790.02400.09850.001059613.586065.66
Table
Table 2. Trace element concentrations of zircon grains from Changdagou granodiorite porphyry.
Table 2. Trace element concentrations of zircon grains from Changdagou granodiorite porphyry.
SamplesTiYLaCePrNdSmEuGdTbDyHoErTmYbPHf
CDG01-017.0513240.1329.890.0612.410.3817.586.9399442215455538210,978
CDG01-025.11121110.4133.412.7811.864.070.7419.026.7490381954749360511,436
CDG01-032.7915870.00415.150.051.212.980.5119.267.74113522656468139812,002
CDG01-042.91256b.d.5.450.021.162.040.1715.016.388412165661534012,736
CDG01-054.2110010.0088.460.020.71.990.3813.554.9971321684246136511,900
CDG01-063.6410748.01429.052.2510.973.410.5416.975.8578351754246353912,201
CDG01-072.2310220.0088.510.030.721.740.3213.945.1371331684143535011,657
CDG01-082.8412580.01710.340.040.942.350.4819.517.0595412044747841011,449
CDG01-094.1614650.03818.820.091.534.430.7628.349.73122482255151234212,681
CDG01-102.058730.0086.670.030.661.520.311.964.6964291433435958912,359
CDG01-114.78109244.713106.1612.555.3312.010.5124.767.288361754141634111,535
CDG01-123.89820.0087.250.050.621.770.4711.54.666301604144436511,951
CDG01-133.981174b.d.7.70.020.831.960.313.975.7383371944850839012,297
CDG01-142.5812920.00414.020.030.982.330.5217.236.7795412085153836311,644
CDG01-15559710520.139.570.050.641.950.4313.325.3575331724245832212,351
CDG01-163.68721b.d.5.530.020.341.470.38.683.3749231193134342811,130
CDG01-174.0312770.0387.40.081.23.280.5620.267.66101422034950934811,229
CDG01-183.18750b.d.3.950.040.491.560.3410.24.0354241253133538112,121
CDG01-194.113190.14911.490.091.142.350.5417.546.4594412215662439711,235
CDG01-203.691476b.d.10.690.041.032.80.5617.957.39105472445961229711,601
CDG01-212.745930.0043.480.020.461.160.149.073.554619962324962211,447
CDG01-222.9712061.92113.540.633.353.10.5216.545.8783381944852030412,036
CDG01-232.23794b.d.5.980.030.611.350.2510.644.0254251293335837811,304
CDG01-241.5212720.0049.260.020.782.010.4216.876.3789402065052333811,157
CDG01-252.3610810.0046.080.081.233.120.6217.136.681351724041841510,100
CDG01-264.951635b.d.9.110.051.182.460.5819.98.29120542636264333511,568
CDG01-273.4310140.0088.150.030.671.690.4212.224.8668321674346838711,428
CDG01-282.9114440.05811.590.051.32.380.4417.827.31103472345861430511,514
CDG01-291.93687b.d.4.780.030.481.250.28.833.649221132729734911,722
CDG01-303.6211840.0046.470.050.82.520.3115.596.3987381944749243711,958
Note: “b.d.” represent the concentration below the detection limit.
Table
Table 3. Hf isotopes in zircon grains from Changdagou granodiorite porphyry.
Table 3. Hf isotopes in zircon grains from Changdagou granodiorite porphyry.
Samples176Hf/177Hf1σ176Lu/177Hf1σ176Yb/177Hf1σεHf(0)εHf(t)TDM(Ma)TDMC(Ma)
CDG01-010.2825490.0000084530.0015430.000025250.0419310.000585−8.33−3.7810091466
CDG01-020.2825530.0000077400.0015660.000012180.0419160.000406−8.22−3.6610051458
CDG01-030.2825680.0000077930.0013370.000017670.0364740.000564−7.66−3.089761421
CDG01-050.2825730.0000085120.0015800.000008610.0420210.000185−7.48−2.939751412
CDG01-060.2825560.0000085770.0014260.000009960.0391200.000397−8.09−3.519961449
CDG01-070.2825690.0000081650.0014590.000009390.0396050.000191−7.63−3.069781420
CDG01-080.2825560.0000079870.0014720.000015680.0399880.000302−8.09−3.529971450
CDG01-110.2825200.0000084770.0019700.000042120.0571670.001163−9.37−4.8810631536
CDG01-120.2825650.0000077800.0015490.000031190.0420510.000783−7.77−3.219861430
CDG01-130.2825610.0000090070.0014950.000012400.0395600.000151−7.93−3.369911439
CDG01-150.2825740.0000085910.0012980.000010650.0359590.000402−7.47−2.879671408
CDG01-160.2825750.0000077490.0007310.000012810.0194670.000398−7.41−2.749511400
CDG01-190.2825610.0000088470.0015690.000015550.0433780.000470−7.93−3.379931440
CDG01-200.2825600.0000081370.0015280.000026730.0423510.000834−7.94−3.399931441
CDG01-210.2825700.0000075210.0008590.000009440.0230620.000150−7.62−2.969621414
CDG01-220.2825460.0000076040.0013550.000002750.0372670.000181−8.44−3.8610081471
CDG01-250.2825600.0000078550.0011610.000008180.0319580.000242−7.97−3.369841439
CDG01-260.2825380.0000094560.0020750.000035790.0570390.000774−8.73−4.2410391496
CDG01-270.2825490.0000086000.0014540.000021300.0398990.000614−8.33−3.7610061465
CDG01-300.2825650.0000073780.0010370.000017200.0288080.000593−7.78−3.159731426
Note: εHf(t) = 10,000 × {[(176Hf/177Hf)S − (176Lu/177Hf)S × (eλt − 1)]/(176Hf/177Hf)CHUR.0 − (176Lu/177Hf) CHUR × (eλt − 1)] − 1}. TDM1 = 1/λ × ln{1 + [(176Hf/177Hf)S − (176Hf/177Hf)DM]/[(176Lu/177Hf)S − 176Lu/177Hf)DM]}. TDM2 = tDM − (tDM − t) × [(fcc − fs)/(fcc − fDM)]. (176Lu/177Hf) CHUR = 0.0332, (176Hf/177Hf)CHUR.0 = 0.282772, (176Lu/177Hf)DM = 0.0384 and (176Hf/177Hf) DM = 0.28325; (176Lu/177Hf)mean crust = 0.015. fcc = [(176Lu/177Hf) mean crust/(176Lu/177Hf) CHUR] − 1; fs = fLu/Hf; fDM = [(176Lu/177Hf)DM/(176Lu/177Hf) CHUR] − 1; t = crystallization time of zircon [51,52].

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Li, X.-Y.; Zhang, J.-R.; Song, H.; Lai, C.-K. Copper Mineralization Potential of Late Triassic Granitoids in Northern Yidun Arc, SW China. Minerals 2019, 9, 337. https://doi.org/10.3390/min9060337

AMA Style

Li X-Y, Zhang J-R, Song H, Lai C-K. Copper Mineralization Potential of Late Triassic Granitoids in Northern Yidun Arc, SW China. Minerals. 2019; 9(6):337. https://doi.org/10.3390/min9060337

Chicago/Turabian Style

Li, Xing-Yuan, Jing-Ru Zhang, Hao Song, and Chun-Kit Lai. 2019. "Copper Mineralization Potential of Late Triassic Granitoids in Northern Yidun Arc, SW China" Minerals 9, no. 6: 337. https://doi.org/10.3390/min9060337

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