2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.oregeorev.2019.103014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fluid inclusion and stable isotope study of the Lubin-Zardeh epithermal Cu-Au deposit in Zanjan Province, NW Iran: Implications for ore genesis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 115 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Sulfide minerals from the Tashvir deposit show a wide range of δ 34 S H2S-CDT values from −17.8‰ to −5.1‰ (average −12.7‰), and those from the Varmazyar deposit fall into a narrow range from −8.6‰ to −3.8‰, averaging −6.1‰. These data are lower than the range of mantle/magmatic δ 34 S VCDT values (±3‰; Chaussidon and Lorand, 1990) and are similar to the sulfur isotope compositions of IS epithermal base metal deposits (e.g., Aliabad-Khanchy, Zajkan, Marshoun, Abbasabad, Armaqan Khaneh, and Lubin-Zardeh) in the THMB (Figure 10B), whose sulfur is interpreted to have been originated from the magmatic system (Kouhestani et al, 2018a;Kouhestani et al, 2019a;Kouhestani et al, 2019b;Zamanian et al, 2019;Kouhestani et al, 2020;Kouhestani et al, 2022). Compared with different types of epithermal systems, δ 34 S values of the Tashvir and Varmazyar deposits are mostly consistent with the HS and IS deposits (Figure 10B).…”
Section: Ore-forming Materials and Sulfur Sourcesmentioning
confidence: 50%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Sulfide minerals from the Tashvir deposit show a wide range of δ 34 S H2S-CDT values from −17.8‰ to −5.1‰ (average −12.7‰), and those from the Varmazyar deposit fall into a narrow range from −8.6‰ to −3.8‰, averaging −6.1‰. These data are lower than the range of mantle/magmatic δ 34 S VCDT values (±3‰; Chaussidon and Lorand, 1990) and are similar to the sulfur isotope compositions of IS epithermal base metal deposits (e.g., Aliabad-Khanchy, Zajkan, Marshoun, Abbasabad, Armaqan Khaneh, and Lubin-Zardeh) in the THMB (Figure 10B), whose sulfur is interpreted to have been originated from the magmatic system (Kouhestani et al, 2018a;Kouhestani et al, 2019a;Kouhestani et al, 2019b;Zamanian et al, 2019;Kouhestani et al, 2020;Kouhestani et al, 2022). Compared with different types of epithermal systems, δ 34 S values of the Tashvir and Varmazyar deposits are mostly consistent with the HS and IS deposits (Figure 10B).…”
Section: Ore-forming Materials and Sulfur Sourcesmentioning
confidence: 50%
“…Based on these data and related trapping pressure estimations, we conclude that ore-stage quartzsulfide veins at Tashvir and Varmazyar essentially occurred at minimum hydrostatic pressures of 10-69 and 14-68 bars, respectively. Taking the average density of the FIs, the inferred minimum metallogenic paleodepths range from 103 to 706 m at Tashvir and 143-695 m at Varmazyar, which are comparable with those of mineralization depth of the epithermal deposits worldwide (<300-1,000 m, Cooke and Simmons, 2000;Albinson et al, 2001;Simmons et al, 2005), e.g., in the THMB of northwestern Iran (200-1,400 m, Kouhestani et al, 2018a;b, 2020Zamanian et al, 2019).…”
Section: Minimum Fluid Trapping Pressure and Mineralization Depthmentioning
confidence: 58%
See 3 more Smart Citations