2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.oregeorev.2021.104555
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Shamsabad Fe-Mn deposit, Markazi province, Iran: LA-ICP-MS and sulfur isotopic geochemistry

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 60 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Both the Emarat deposit and the Shams-Abad deposit are hosted by the same uppermost part of the massive limestone immediately below shale unit ("Klsd") that hosts the Eastern Haft-Savaran deposit. The Emarat deposit has been classified as an MVT deposit (Ehya et al, 2010), whereas the Shams-Abad deposit has been classified as synsedimentary seafloor hydrothermal (Ehya & Marbouti, 2021). Classification of these two deposits with similar stratigraphic positions as different deposit types do not seem logical, and we believe that these two deposits are misclassified.…”
Section: Mineralization Characteristics and Timingmentioning
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Both the Emarat deposit and the Shams-Abad deposit are hosted by the same uppermost part of the massive limestone immediately below shale unit ("Klsd") that hosts the Eastern Haft-Savaran deposit. The Emarat deposit has been classified as an MVT deposit (Ehya et al, 2010), whereas the Shams-Abad deposit has been classified as synsedimentary seafloor hydrothermal (Ehya & Marbouti, 2021). Classification of these two deposits with similar stratigraphic positions as different deposit types do not seem logical, and we believe that these two deposits are misclassified.…”
Section: Mineralization Characteristics and Timingmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…However, others favor a synsedimentary to syndiagenetic origin (Yarmohammadi et al, 2016;Boveiri Konari et al, 2017;Boveiri Konari & Rastad, 2018;Maanijou et al, 2020). The Emarat Zn-Pb deposit in the northwestern part of the Arak Mining District was classified as an MVT deposit by Ehya et al (2010) based on S and Pb isotopic data for hydrothermal sulphide minerals, whereas the Shams-Abad Fe-Mn-(Pb) deposit in the central part of the Arak Mining District was classified as a synsedimentary seafloor hydrothermal deposit (Ehya & Marbouti, 2021). Based on geological and textural characteristics, the Robat Zn-Pb-Ba deposit was classified as an Irish-type deposit by Niroomand et al (2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The dis tri bu tion of REY in the sulphides of the Bou-Izourane and Tigrinine-Taabast dis tricts is char acter ized by sig nif i cant neg a tive Y and Ce anom a lies. There fore, the low ΣREE val ues and neg a tive Ce anom a lies are con sid -ered typ i cal of a de posit strongly re lated to hy dro ther mal flu ids (Jach and Dudek, 2005;Josso et al, 2017;Ehya and Marbouti, 2021), and the pres ence of sulphates in creases the sol u bil ity of Y (Guan et al, 2022).…”
Section: Geochemical Constraintsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These ore deposits are hosted in early Cretaceous sandstone, tuffaceous siltstone, dolomitized and silicified limestone and sandstone, and they are associated with minor volcanic rocks (Fig. 10; Akbari, 2017;Akbari et al, 2020;Peernajmodin, 2018;Rajabi et al, 2019a;Maanijou et al, 2020;Han et al, 2020;Ehya & Marbouti, 2021). In these deposits, Fe-bearing carbonates (siderite and ankerite) are the most important hydrothermal minerals that are associated with barite, chalcopyrite, pyrite, galena, pyrolusite, todorokite, coronadite, rhodochrosite (Peernajmoin, 2018;Akbari et al, 2020).…”
Section: Sideritic Irish-type Fe-mn-pb-zn (±Ag±ba±cu) Depositsmentioning
confidence: 99%