Structural geometry of orogenic gold deposits： Implications for exploration of world-class and giant deposits

With very few exceptions, orogenic gold deposits formed in subduction-related tectonic settings in accretionary to collisional orogenic belts from Archean to Tertiary times. Their genesis, including metal and fluid source, fluid pathways, depositional mechanisms, and timing relative to regional structural and metamorphic events, continues to be controversial. However, there is now general agreement that these deposits formed from metamorphic fluids, either from metamorphism of intra-basinal rock sequences or de-volatilization of a subducted sediment wedge, during a change from a compressional to transpressional, less commonly transtensional, stress regime, prior to orogenic collapse. In the case of Archean and Paleoproterozoic deposits, the formation of orogenic gold deposits was one of the last events prior to cratonization. The late timing of orogenic gold deposits within the structural evolution of the host orogen implies that any earlier structures may be mineralized and that the current structural geometry of the gold deposits is equivalent to that at the time of their formation provided that there has been no significant post-gold orogenic overprint. Within the host volcano-sedimentary sequences at the province scale, world-class orogenic gold deposits are most commonly located in second-order structures adjacent to crustal scale faults and shear zones, representing the first-order ore-forming fluid pathways, and whose deep lithospheric connection is marked by lamprophyre intrusions which, however, have no direct genetic association with gold deposition. More specifically, the gold deposits are located adjacent to ～10°-25° district-scale jogs in these crustal-scale faults. These jogs are commonly the site of arrays of ～70° cross faults that accommodate the bending of the more rigid components, for example volcanic rocks and intrusive sills, of the host belts. Rotation of blocks between these accommodation faults causes failure of more competent units and/or reactivation and dilation of pre-existing structures, leading to deposit-scale focussing of ore-fluid and gold deposition.Anticlinal or antiformal fold hinges, particularly those of ＇locked-up＇ folds with ～30° apical angles and overturned back limbs, represent sites of brittle-ductile rock failure and provide one of the more robust parameters for location of orogenic gold deposits.In orogenic belts with abundant pre-gold granitic intrusions, particularly Precambrian granitegreenstone terranes, the boundaries between the rigid granitic bodies and more ductile greenstone sequences are commonly sites of heterogeneous stress and inhomogeneous strain. Thus, contacts between granitic intrusions and volcano-sedimentary sequences are common sites of ore-fluid infiltration and gold deposition. For orogenic gold deposits at deeper crustal levels, ore-forming fluids are commonly focused along strain gradients between more compressional zones where volcano-sedimentary sequences are thinned and relatively more extensional zones where they are thickened. World-class orogenic gold deposits are commonly located in the deformed volcano-sedimentary sequences in such strain gradients adjacent to triple-point junctions defined by the granitic intrusions, or along the zones of assembly of micro-blocks on a regional scale. These repetitive province to district-scale geometrical patterns of structures within the orogenic belts are clearly critical parameters in geology-based exploration targeting for orogenic gold deposits.

The conjunction of factors that lead to formation of giant gold provinces and deposits in non-arc settings

It is quite evident that it is not anomalous metal transport,nor unique depositional conditions,nor any single factor at the deposit scale,that dictates whether a mineral deposit becomes a giant or not.A hierarchical approach thus is required to progressively examine controlling parameters at successively decreasing scales in the total mineral system to understand the location of giant gold deposits in non-arc environments.For giant orogenic,intrusion-related gold systems（IRGS） and Carlin-type gold deposits and iron oxide-copper-gold（IOCG） deposits,there are common factors among all of these at the lithospheric to crustal scale.All are sited in giant gold provinces controlled by complex fundamental fault or shear zones that follow craton margins or,in the case of most Phanerozoic orogenic giants,define the primary suture zones between tectonic terranes.Giant provinces of IRGS,IOCG,and Carlin-type deposits require melting of metasomatized lithosphere beneath craton margins with ascent of hybrid lamprophyric to granitic magmas and associated heat flux to generate the giant province.The IRGS and IOCG deposits require direct exsolution of volatile-rich magmatic-hydrothermal fluids,whereas the association of such melts with Carlin-type ores is more indirect and enigmatic.Giant orogenic gold provinces show no direct relationship to such magmatism.forming from metamorphic fluids,but show an indirect relationship to lamprophyres that reflect the mantle connectivity of controlling first-order structures.In contrast to their province scale similarities,the different giant gold deposit styles show contrasting critical controls at the district to deposit scale.For orogenic gold deposits,the giants appear to have formed by conjunction of a greater number of parameters to those that control smaller deposits,with resultant geometrical and lithostratigraphic complexity as a guide to their location.There are few giant IRGS due to their inferior fluid-flux systems relative to orogenic gold deposits,and those few giants are essentially preservational exceptions.Many Carlin-type deposits are giants due to the exceptional conjunction of both structural and lithological parameters that caused reactive and permeable rocks,enriched in syngenetic gold,to be located below an impermeable cap along antiformal ＂trends＂.Hydrocarbons probably played an important role in concentrating metal.The supergiant Post-Betze deposit has additional ore zones in strain heterogeneities surrounding the pre-gold Goldstrike stock.All unequivocal IOCG deposits are giant or near-giant deposits in terms of gold-equivalent resources,partly due to economic factors for this relatively poorly understood,low Cu-Au grade deposit type.The supergiant Olympic Dam deposit,the most shallowly formed deposit among the larger IOCGs,probably owes its origin to eruption of volatile-rich hybrid magma at surface,with formation of a large maar and intense and widespread brecciation,alteration and Cu-Au-U deposition in a huge rock volume.

The dilemma of the Jiaodong gold deposits: Are they unique?

The ca. 126e120 Ma Au deposits of the Jiaodong Peninsula, eastern China, define the country＇s largest gold province with an overall endowment estimated as＆gt;3000 t Au. The vein and disseminated ores are hosted by NE-to NNE-trending brittle normal faults that parallel the margins of ca. 165e150 Ma, deeply emplaced, lower crustal melt granites. The deposits are sited along the faults for many tens of kilometers and the larger orebodies are associated with dilatational jogs. Country rocks to the granites are Pre-cambrian high-grade metamorphic rocks located on both sides of a Triassic suture between the North and South China blocks. During early Mesozoic convergent deformation, the ore-hosting structures developed as ductile thrust faults that were subsequently reactivated during Early Cretaceous ＂Yan-shanian＂intracontinental extensional deformation and associated gold formation. 〈br〉 Classification of the gold deposits remains problematic. Many features resemble those typical of orogenic Au including the linear structural distribution of the deposits, mineralization style, ore and alteration assemblages, and ore fluid chemistry. However, Phanerozoic orogenic Au deposits are formed by prograde metamorphism of accreted oceanic rocks in Cordilleran-style orogens. The Jiaodong de-posits, in contrast, formed within two Precambrian blocks approximately 2 billion years after devolati-lization of the country rocks, and thus require a model that involves alternative fluid and metal sources for the ores. A widespread suite of ca. 130e123 Ma granodiorites overlaps temporally with the ores, but shows a poor spatial association with the deposits. Furthermore, the deposit distribution and mineral-ization style is atypical of ores formed from nearby magmas. The ore concentration requires fluid focusing during some type of sub-crustal thermal event, which could be broadly related to a combination of coeval lithospheric thinning, asthenospheric upwelling, paleo-Pacific plate subduction, and seismicity along the continental-scale Tan-Lu fault. Possible ore genesis scenarios include those where ore fluids were produced directly by the metamorphism of oceanic lithosphere and overlying sediment on the subducting paleo-Pacific slab, or by devolatilization of an enriched mantle wedge above the slab. Both the sulfur and gold could be sourced from either the oceanic sediments or the serpentinized mantle. A better understanding of the architecture of the paleo-Pacific slab during Early Cretaceous below the eastern margin of China is essential to determination of the validity of possible models.