No abstract

Abstract--Chlorite minerals, found in a great variety of rocks and geological environments, display a wide range of chemical compositions and a variety of polytypes, which reflect the physicochemical conditions under which they formed. Of particular importance for studies dealing with ore deposit genesis, metamorphism, hydrotherrnal alteration or diagenesis is the paleotemperature of chlorite crystallization. However, in order to understand the relationship between chlorite composition and formation temperature and hence use chlorite as a geothermometer, one must determine how other parameters influence chlorite composition. These parameters may include fO2 and pH of the solution and Fe/(Fe + Mg) and bulk mineral composition of the host rock.Four approaches to chlorite geothermometry, one structural and three compositional, have been proposed in the past: 1) a polytype method based on the (largely qualitative) observation that structural changes in chlorite may be partly temperature-dependent (Hayes, 1970); 2) an empirical calibration between the tetrahedral aluminum occupancy in chlorites and measured temperature in geothermal systems (Cathelineau, 1988), which has subsequently been modified by several workers; 3) a six-component chlorite solid solution model based upon equilibrium between chlorite and an aqueous solution, which uses thermodynamic properties calibrated with data from geothermal and hydrothermal systems (Walshe, 1986); and 4) a theoretical method based on the intersection of chlorite-carbonate reactions and the CO2-H20 miscibility surface in temperature-XCO2 space, which requires that the composition of a coexisting carbonate phase (dolomite, ankerite, Fe-calcite or siderite) be known or estimated (Hutcheon, 1990). These four approaches are reviewed and the different calculation methods for the compositional geotherrnometers are applied to a selection of chlorite analyses from the literature. Results of this comparative exercise indicate that no single chlorite geothermometer performs satisfactorily over the whole range of natural conditions (different temperatures, coexisting assemblages, Fe/(Fe + Mg), fO2, etc.).. Therefore, chlorite geothermometry should b e used with caution and only in combination with alternative methods of estimating paleotemperatures.

The ubiquity of Au-bearing arsenian pyrite in hydrothermal ore deposits suggests that the coupled geochemical behaviour of Au and As in this sulfide occurs under a wide range of physico-chemical conditions. Despite significant advances in the last 20 years, fundamental factors controlling Au and As ratios in pyrite from ore deposits remain poorly known. Here we explore these constraints using new and previously published EMPA, LA-ICP-MS, SIMS, and μ-PIXE analyses of As and Au in pyrite from Carlin-type Au, epithermal Au,

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

More than half of the 25 largest known porphyry copper deposits, defined in terms of contained copper metal, formed during three time periods: the Paleocene to Eocene, Eocene to Oligocene, and middle Miocene to Pliocene. These giant deposits are clustered within three provinces, central Chile, northern Chile, and southwest Arizona-northern Mexico. Other giant deposits occur in Montana,