Proposed Title 1: - Queen's University

Proposed Title 1: - Queen's University Proposed Title 1: - Queen's University

geol.queensu.ca
from geol.queensu.ca More from this publisher
07.01.2015 Views

Figure 3.11. Conceptual genetic model for U mineralization in the Beaverlodge area. A: Deposition of the Murmac Bay Group sediments in a tectonically active fault-bounded basin is followed by mylonitization during the Arrowsmith Orogen. B: Mylonites reactivated during late stages of the Arrowsmith Orogen resulting in formation of cataclasite and early tensional vein-type U 2 mineralization. Hydraulic fracturing in response to fluid generation via 121

decompression and hydration reactions was the mechanism of veins formation. U was transported as uranyl-carbonate-fluoride complexes. C: At Gunnar, U 3 was derived from magmatic fluids from the Gunnar granite. PO -3 4 and F - were important ore transporting complexes. D: Reactivation of fault zones during early regional metamorphism of the Trans- Hudson or post-peak Thelon-Taltson Orogen resulted in massive brecciation at shallow structural levels. Metamorphic-hydrothermal U-mineralizing fluids derived from dehydration of hydrous minerals during metamorphism ascended upward along deep fractures and decompression caused decrease in the solubility of the carbonate complexes promoting U deposition. E: During the Paleoproterozoic, the Martin Lake Basin and associated alkaline mafic dikes formed and hydrothermal U 5 -mineralizing solutions resulted in magmatichydrothermal degassing along pre-existing fractures. F: Ore-forming brines from the Athabasca Basin descended along fractures in the basement rocks and U 6 deposition was via reduction through interaction between oxidizing basinal brines and reduced metamorphic basement lithologies. G: Post-ore incursion and circulation of meteoric water through structurally reactivated fault zones that remain a zone of preferential fluid circulation. H: Erosion of the Athabasca and part of Martin Lake basin rocks and weathering of the deposit resulted in the recent formation of secondary uranium minerals and late alteration veins. Deposition of the 2.33 Ga Murmac Bay Group sediments (Hartlaub and Ashton, 1998) was followed by intrusion of the ca. 2321±3 Ma Gunnar granite (Evoy, 1969; Hartlaub et al., 2004a), which hosts the granite-related metasomatic-type U 3 uranium mineralization (Fig. 3.11C). The timing of this mineralization is constrained between the age of the granite (ca. 2321±3 Ma) and the brecciation event (1850 Ma; Dieng et al., 2011) that overprinted the granite-related U-mineralization at Gunnar. δ 18 O, δ 13 C and δ 2 H isotopic compositions of syn-ore Cal 5 calcite and Chl 5 chlorite (Figs. 3.7 and 3.8) indicate that U 3 mineralization has ore-forming components consistent with derivation from magmatic fluids (Fig. 3.11C). The strong negative Eu anomaly in U 3 uraninite indicates retention of plagioclase during albitization of the granite. Collectively, these results demonstrate that fluids involved in the metasomatic alteration of the Gunnar granite could 122

decompression and hydration reactions was the mechanism of veins formation. U was<br />

transported as uranyl-carbonate-fluoride complexes. C: At Gunnar, U 3 was derived from<br />

magmatic fluids from the Gunnar granite. PO -3 4 and F - were important ore transporting<br />

complexes. D: Reactivation of fault zones during early regional metamorphism of the Trans-<br />

Hudson or post-peak Thelon-Taltson Orogen resulted in massive brecciation at shallow<br />

structural levels. Metamorphic-hydrothermal U-mineralizing fluids derived from dehydration<br />

of hydrous minerals during metamorphism ascended upward along deep fractures and<br />

decompression caused decrease in the solubility of the carbonate complexes promoting U<br />

deposition. E: During the Paleoproterozoic, the Martin Lake Basin and associated alkaline<br />

mafic dikes formed and hydrothermal U 5 -mineralizing solutions resulted in magmatichydrothermal<br />

degassing along pre-existing fractures. F: Ore-forming brines from the<br />

Athabasca Basin descended along fractures in the basement rocks and U 6 deposition was via<br />

reduction through interaction between oxidizing basinal brines and reduced metamorphic<br />

basement lithologies. G: Post-ore incursion and circulation of meteoric water through<br />

structurally reactivated fault zones that remain a zone of preferential fluid circulation. H:<br />

Erosion of the Athabasca and part of Martin Lake basin rocks and weathering of the deposit<br />

resulted in the recent formation of secondary uranium minerals and late alteration veins.<br />

Deposition of the 2.33 Ga Murmac Bay Group sediments (Hartlaub and Ashton,<br />

1998) was followed by intrusion of the ca. 2321±3 Ma Gunnar granite (Evoy, 1969;<br />

Hartlaub et al., 2004a), which hosts the granite-related metasomatic-type U 3 uranium<br />

mineralization (Fig. 3.11C). The timing of this mineralization is constrained between the<br />

age of the granite (ca. 2321±3 Ma) and the brecciation event (1850 Ma; Dieng et al., 2011)<br />

that overprinted the granite-related U-mineralization at Gunnar. δ 18 O, δ 13 C and δ 2 H<br />

isotopic compositions of syn-ore Cal 5 calcite and Chl 5 chlorite (Figs. 3.7 and 3.8) indicate<br />

that U 3 mineralization has ore-forming components consistent with derivation from<br />

magmatic fluids (Fig. 3.11C). The strong negative Eu anomaly in U 3 uraninite indicates<br />

retention of plagioclase during albitization of the granite. Collectively, these results<br />

demonstrate that fluids involved in the metasomatic alteration of the Gunnar granite could<br />

122

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!