alteration and cu-zn mineralization of the turgeon ...gagné, sacha marie-boston, and simon bernier...
TRANSCRIPT
Alteration and Cu-Zn Mineralization of the Turgeon Volcanogenic Massive Sulfide Deposit
(New Brunswick, Canada)
Mémoire
Erik Lalonde
Maîtrise interuniversitaire en sciences de la Terre
Maître ès sciences (M.Sc.)
Québec, Canada
© Erik Lalonde, 2014
iii
Résumé
Le gîte Turgeon est un sulfure massif volcanogène (SMV) riche en Cu-Zn, encaissé
dans les roches volcano-sédimentaires ordoviciennes du Groupe de Fournier dans la
Boutonnière Elmtree-Belledune, au Nouveau-Brunswick (Canada). Le Groupe de Fournier
comprend les formations Devereaux et Pointe Verte, qui sont tous les deux composées de
gabbros et de basaltes cousinés. Le gîte Turgeon est composé de deux lentilles de sulfures
massifs Cu-Zn avec des stockwerks chalcopyrite-pyrite sous-jacents aux deux lentilles. La
géochimie indique que les roches encaissantes sont des basaltes et des andésites d’affinité
tholéiitique de type MORB. Les roches encaissantes proximales aux lentilles de sulfures
massifs sont composées de chlorite + quartz dans les zones stockwerks, tandis que les zones
adjacentes aux lentilles de sulfures massifs sont altérées en calcite + sidérite + pyrite + talc.
Les sulfures à Turgeon ont une valeur δ34
S moyenne de 6.9 ‰ (5.8 – 10‰), indiquant que
le soufre est principalement dérivé de la réduction thermochimique de sulfate d’eau de mer
ordovicienne.
v
Abstract
The Turgeon deposit is a mafic-type Cu-Zn volcanogenic massive sulfide (VMS)
deposit hosted in the Middle Ordovician gabbros, sheeted dykes, and pillow basalts of the
Devereaux Formation of the Fournier Group in the Elmtree-Belledune Inlier, northern New
Brunswick (Canada). The Turgeon deposit consists of two lensed-shaped Cu-Zn massive
sulfide zones (“100m Zinc”, “48-49”) composed of pyrite, chalcopyrite, pyrrhotite, and
sphalerite, underlain by chalcopyrite-pyrite stockworks. Trace element geochemistry
indicates that the host rocks are composed primarily of tholeiitic basalts and andesites with
mid-ocean ridge basalt (MORB) signatures. Alteration mineral assemblages of the footwall
basalts proximal to mineralization are dominantly chlorite ± quartz in the stockwork zone,
and calcite ± siderite ± pyrite ± talc near the massive sulfide lenses. Sulfides at Turgeon
have an average δ34
S of 6.9 ‰ (5.8 – 10‰), indicating that sulfur was derived from
thermochemical reduction of Ordovician seawater sulfate.
vii
Table of contents RÉSUMÉ ........................................................................................................................................................ III
ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................................................... V
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................ IX
FOREWORD .................................................................................................................................................. XI
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Generalities ............................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Objectives and methods ............................................................................................................................ 2
1.3 Presentation of the article ......................................................................................................................... 3
CHAPTER 2: ALTERATION AND CU-ZN MINERALIZATION OF THE TURGEON
VOLCANOGENIC MASSIVE SULFIDE DEPOSIT (NEW BRUNSWICK, CANADA) ......................... 5
2.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 5
2.2 REGIONAL GEOLOGY OF THE BMC ................................................................................................. 7
2.2.1 Northern Miramichi Highlands ......................................................................................................... 7
2.2.2 Elmtree-Belledune Inlier (EBI) ......................................................................................................... 9
2.3 ANALYTICAL METHODS .................................................................................................................. 12
2.4 GEOLOGY OF THE TURGEON DEPOSIT ......................................................................................... 13
2.4.1 Least altered basalt, andesite, and rhyolite..................................................................................... 14
2.4.2 Basalt and andesite epidote alteration ............................................................................................ 15
2.4.3 Basalt and andesite chlorite alteration ........................................................................................... 16
2.4.4 Lithogeochemistry ........................................................................................................................... 17
2.5 CU-ZN VMS MINERALIZATION OF THE TURGEON DEPOSIT ................................................... 20
2.6 HYDROTHERMAL SULFIDE FACIES ............................................................................................... 25
2.6.1 Chalcopyrite-pyrite stockwork ........................................................................................................ 25
2.6.2 Massive chalcopyrite-pyrrhotite ± pyrite ........................................................................................ 25
2.6.3 Massive pyrite ................................................................................................................................. 26
2.6.4 Pyrite-chalcopyrite-sphalerite breccia............................................................................................ 26
2.7 SULFIDE CHEMISTRY AND TEXTURES ......................................................................................... 28
2.7.1 Pyrite ............................................................................................................................................... 28
2.7.2 Chalcopyrite .................................................................................................................................... 29
2.7.3 Pyrrhotite ........................................................................................................................................ 29
2.7.4 Sphalerite ........................................................................................................................................ 30
2.8 ALTERATION GEOCHEMISTRY ....................................................................................................... 31
2.8.1 Chlorite geothermometry ................................................................................................................ 35
2.9 SULFUR ISOTOPE GEOCHEMISTRY ............................................................................................... 37
2.10 COMPARISON TO VMS DEPOSITS OF THE BMC ........................................................................ 38
2.10.1 Tectonic setting ............................................................................................................................. 38
2.10.2 Source of sulfur ............................................................................................................................. 39
2.10.3 Sulfide mineralization ................................................................................................................... 41
2.10.4 Hydrothermal alteration ............................................................................................................... 43
2.11 COMPARISON TO OTHER APPALACHIAN VMS DEPOSITS ..................................................... 44
2.11.1 The Buchans Camp VMS deposits, Newfoundland (Canada) ....................................................... 44
2.11.2 The VMS deposits of the Rambler Camp and Wild Bight Group, Newfoundland (Canada) ......... 45
2.11.3 The Betts Cove and Tilt Cove VMS deposits, Newfoundland (Canada) ........................................ 46
2.12 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................... 47
CHAPTER 3: GENERAL CONCLUSION .................................................................................................. 49
BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................................................... 51
APPENDIX 1: ANDESITE GEOCHEMISTRY, TURGEON .................................................................... 57
APPENDIX 2: BASALT GEOCHEMISTRY, TURGEON ........................................................................ 59
viii
APPENDIX 3: RHYOLITE GEOCHEMISTRY, TURGEON ................................................................... 62
APPENDIX 4: SULFIDE GEOCHEMISTRY, TURGEON ....................................................................... 64
APPENDIX 5: ELECTRON MICROPROBE DATA FOR PYRITE ........................................................ 67
APPENDIX 6: ELECTRON MICROPROBE DATA FOR CHALCOPYRITE....................................... 69
APPENDIX 7: ELECTRON MICROPROBE DATA FOR PYRRHOTITE ............................................ 70
APPENDIX 8: ELECTRON MICROPROBE DATA FOR SPHLERITE ................................................ 71
APPENDIX 9: ELECTRON MICROPROBE DATA FOR CHLORITE .................................................. 72
APPENDIX 10: SULFUR ISOTOPE DATA FOR SULFIDES, TURGEON ............................................ 73
APPENDIX 11: COMPARATIVE TRACE ELEMENT CONCENTRATIONS BETWEEN TURGEON
AND THE VMS DEPOSITS OF THE BMC ................................................................................................ 74
ix
List of figures
Figure 1: Geologic map of the northeastern Appalachian Orogen. ..................................................... 6
Figure 2 : Regional geological map of the BMC and EBI ................................................................ 10
Figure 3 : Geologic map of the EBI .................................................................................................. 11
Figure 4 : Geologic map of the Turgeon deposit .............................................................................. 14
Figure 5 : Least and most altered rocks at Turgeon .......................................................................... 15
Figure 6 : Cross-section through A2 ................................................................................................. 16
Figure 7 : Geochemistry of the volcanic rocks of the Turgeon deposit ............................................ 18
Figure 8 : Trace element composition of the Turgeon volcanic rocks .............................................. 19
Figure 9 : Tectonic affinity discrimination diagrams for Turgeon volcanic rocks............................ 20
Figure 10 : Schematic cross-section through FT-11-04 .................................................................... 21
Figure 11 : Geologic map of the Powerline showing. ....................................................................... 22
Figure 12 : Photographs of the Powerline showing .......................................................................... 23
Figure 13 : Cu – Zn – Pb ternary diagrams. ...................................................................................... 24
Figure 14 : Photographs of different ore types at Turgeon ............................................................... 27
Figure 15 : Photomicrographs of the four main sulfide facies at Turgeon. ....................................... 28
Figure 16 : Cu, Zn, and trace element binary diagrams of sulfide mineralization. ........................... 30
Figure 17 : Zr – TiO2 diagram of Turgeon volcanic rocks. .............................................................. 31
Figure 18 : Elemental mass changes of footwall volcanics, Turgeon deposit .................................. 32
Figure 19 : Alteration box plot of the Turgeon volcanic rocks ......................................................... 33
Figure 20 : Grant isocon diagrams of basalt and andesite. ............................................................... 34
Figure 21 : Chlorite classification diagram. ...................................................................................... 36
Figure 22 : Chlorite geothermometer, Turgeon deposit .................................................................... 36
Figure 23 : δ34S values for pyrite, chalcopyrite, sphalerite, and pyrrhotite. .................................... 37
Figure 24 : Secular variations of sulfide and sulfate δ34S values of worldwide VMS deposits
through geological time .................................................................................................................... 40
xi
Foreword
All of the chapters in this memoir, including the article in the second chapter, were entirely
written by this author. The co-author of the article is Georges Beaudoin (Université Laval).
Georges Beaudoin is also the research supervisor of this authors Master’s project.
This project has benefited from the support and collaboration of several people. I would
firstly like to thank my research supervisor, Georges Beaudoin, for his geological expertise
and guidance over the course of this study. I would also like to thank Éric David, Pierre
Therrien, Martin Plante, and Marc Choquette of Université Laval for their help in acquiring
quality data for this research project. The administrative aid of Guylaine Gaumond was also
much appreciated.
This research project was further made possible with the collaboration and financial
support of Puma Exploration. I would like to thank Marcel Robillard, as well as Dominique
Gagné, Sacha Marie-Boston, and Simon Bernier of Puma Exploration for both their
geological insight and help in providing data for this research project. The geological
expertise of Jim Walker of the Department of Natural Resources of New-Brunswick was
also greatly appreciated.
I would finally like to thank my family and friends (Émilie, Marion, Sheida, Antoine) for
their moral support.
1
Chapter 1 – Introduction
1.1 Generalities
The Turgeon Cu-Zn deposit is located 3 km south-west of the city of Belledune in northern
New Brunswick, Canada. The deposit is part of the Bathurst mining camp (BMC), which
was once considered to be one of Canada’s most prominent base metal mining districts. In
2001, the BMC was responsible for producing 30%, 53% and 17% of Canada’s total
production of Zn, Pb and Ag, respectively (Goodfellow and McCutcheon, 2003).
The Turgeon deposit consists of 15 claims that extend over an area of 218 hectares. Several
exploration projects were undertaken at the Turgeon prospect since the early 1950s. In the
early 1980’s, Esso Minerals undertook an exploration campaign that helped identify the
Powerline and Beaver Pond Cu-Zn showings. Extensive drill core logging showed that the
Turgeon deposit shared several geological characteristics similar to those that characterize
volcanogenic massive sulfide (VMS) deposits. Kettles (1987) completed an MSc thesis and
concluded that the mineralization at Turgeon showcased replacement textures and was syn-
volcanic in origin. Diamond drilling campaigns conducted in 1988 by Heron Mines
confirmed the presence of two massive sulfide lenses on the property. In the early 1990s,
existing drill holes were re-logged in order to better understand the geological architecture
of the deposit. Based on drill core logging and whole rock geochemistry, Thurlow (1993)
provided a revised geological map of the Turgeon prospect. He also classified and
described the main geological units on the property, and came to the conclusion that
Turgeon shared many characteristics with Cyprus-type VMS deposits based on its
predominantly mafic volcanic host rocks and Cu-Zn rich massive sulfide lenses.
In 2007, Puma Exploration acquired 100% of the Turgeon deposits property. Diamond
drilling was undertaken in 2009 through 2011 in order to better constrain geologic
2
resources. This Master’s research project has been undertaken in coordination with Puma
Exploration.
1.2 Objectives and methods
The Turgeon deposit is geologically different from the VMS deposits of the BMC. The
different tectonic blocks of the BMC represent different portions of the Ordovician
Tetagouche-Exploits back-arc basin (van Staal et al., 2003). The majority of the VMS
deposits of the BMC are hosted in the middle Ordovician calc-alkaline felsic volcanic rocks
and accompanying sedimentary rocks of the Tetagouche and California Lake groups,
whereas the Turgeon VMS deposit is hosted in the slightly younger middle to late
Ordovician tholeiitic mafic volcanic rocks of the Fournier Group (Goodfellow and
McCutcheon, 2003). As a result, the VMS deposits of the BMC are classified in the felsic-
silliciclastic group of Franklin et al.’s (2005) lithotectonic VMS deposit classification,
whereas the Turgeon deposit is classified in the mafic group. The Turgeon deposit and the
VMS deposits of the BMC also feature contrasting types of sulfide mineralization as shown
by their different Cu, Zn and Pb grades. The Turgeon deposit is characterized by massive
pyrite-chalcopyrite along with brecciated sphalerite, whereas VMS deposits of the BMC
are characterized by bedded pyrite-sphalerite-galena.
This study therefore aims to place the Turgeon deposit within the regional geological
framework of the BMC. In order to achieve this goal, the objectives of this study are the
following:
1) Determining the geologic and tectonic setting of the Turgeon deposit by:
Performing detailed geological mapping of rock outcrops coupled with
extensive drill core logging.
3
Performing trace element lithogeochemical analyses on the host rocks to
mineralization in order to geochemically classify them.
2) Characterizing the Cu-Zn mineralization and hydrothermal alteration by:
Performing detailed petrographic studies on mineralization and alteration.
Performing alteration lithogeochemical analyses in order to quantify element
mobility.
Performing microprobe analysis on sulfides and hydrothermal alteration
minerals.
Performing isotope studies on sulfides in order to identify the sources of
sulfur.
3) Interpreting the paleoenvironment by:
Comparing the geological characteristics of the Turgeon deposit to those of
the VMS deposits of the BMC.
Comparing the Turgeon deposit to similar Appalachian VMS deposits.
1.3 Presentation of the article
The second chapter of this memoir consists of the article “Alteration and Cu-Zn
mineralization of the Turgeon volcanogenic massive sulfide (VMS) deposit (New
Brunswick, Canada)”. The article will be submitted for scientific publication in Mineralium
Deposita. The article has been entirely written by this author. The co-author of the article is
Georges Beaudoin (Université Laval).
The article begins by briefly describing the geological characteristics of the VMS deposits
of the BMC and how they contrast to those of the Turgeon deposit. The regional geology of
the BMC is then described in detail in order to characterize the tectono-stratigraphy of the
Northern Miramichi Highlands (NMH) and Elmtree-Belledune inlier (EBI). A brief
description of the analytical methods used in the study follows. The local geology of the
4
Turgeon deposit is then described, followed by petrographic and lithogeochemical
descriptions of fresh and altered rocks. Petrographic and geochemical characteristics of
different mineralization types are then described in detail. Hydrothermal alteration
lithogeochemistry is then used to quantify major and trace element mobility. Sulfur isotopic
data is used to determine the source of sulfur of the Turgeon deposit sulfides. The
discussion compares the geological characteristics of the Turgeon deposit with those of the
VMS deposits of the BMC, followed by a comparison to the Buchans, Rambler, Wild Bight
Group and Tilt Cove/Betts Cove VMS deposits in Newfoundland, Canada.
5
Chapter 2: Alteration and Cu-Zn Mineralization of the Turgeon
Volcanogenic Massive Sulfide Deposit (New Brunswick,
Canada)
2.1 Introduction
The Turgeon Cu-Zn volcanogenic massive sulfide (VMS) deposit is located in
Belledune, New Brunswick, Canada, within the Bathurst Mining Camp (BMC). The BMC
is located in the northeastern portion of the Appalachian Orogen, which is divided into
several tectonic zones reflecting different paleogeographic settings within and marginal to
the early Paleozoic Iapetus Ocean (Figure 1). The terrains were deformed and accreted to
the Laurentian continental margin during the closure of the Iapetus Ocean in the Ordovician
and Silurian. The BMC is located in the Dunnage zone of New Brunswick (Figure 1),
which represents Cambro-Ordovician portions of the Iapetan ocean floor, along with
island-arc, back-arc basin, and continental margin strata. Discovered in the early 1950s, the
BMC has been one of Canada’s most prominent base metal mining districts, hosting 25
VMS deposits with resources of 1 Mt or more (Goodfellow and McCutcheon, 2003). The
camp hosts the world-class Brunswick 12 deposit that has produced 229 Mt grading 7.66
wt% Zn, 3.01 wt% Pb, 0.46 wt% Cu, and 91 g/t Ag (Goodfellow and McCutcheon, 2003).
Other notable VMS deposits in the camp include the Brunswick 6 (18.6 Mt; 1.59% Pb,
4.08% Zn, 0.45% Cu), Caribou (69.5 Mt; 1.60% Pb, 4.29% Zn, 0.51% Cu), and Heath
Steele (69.9 Mt; 0.89% Pb, 2.69% Zn, 0.98% Cu) deposits.
The VMS deposits of the BMC are hosted in the Lower to Middle Ordovician
bimodal volcanic and sedimentary rocks of the Tetagouche-Exploits continental back-arc
basin. They belong to the felsic-siliciclastic group of Barrie and Hannington (1999)’s, as
modified by Franklin et al. (2005), lithotectonic VMS classification. The significant VMS
deposits of the BMC are spatially and temporally associated with calc-alkalic felsic
volcanic rocks, interpreted to have formed by melting of continental crust during the early
stages of continental back-arc rifting (Lentz, 2001). The deposits of the BMC are
characterized by bedded Zn-Pb-Cu sulfide facies and chlorite-phengite hydrothermal
6
alteration (Goodfellow and McCutcheon, 2003). In contrast, the Turgeon Cu-Zn VMS
deposit is hosted in tholeiitic MORB pillow basalts, and is a mafic type deposit (Barrie and
Hannington, 1999; Franklin et al., 2005). Turgeon is slightly younger than the rocks hosting
the neighboring VMS deposits of the BMC, and is characterized by chlorite-pyrite
hydrothermal alteration minerals and massive to brecciated Cu-Zn mineralization. The
objective of this study is to characterize the mineralization, hydrothermal alteration, sulfur
source, and tectonic setting of the Turgeon deposit, with the goal of placing it in context
within the geological evolution of the BMC, and comparing it to other similar Appalachian
VMS deposits.
Figure 1: Geologic map of the northeastern Appalachian Orogen illustrating the location of the Turgeon
deposit relative to the VMS deposits of the Buchans Camp, Rambler Camp, Wild Bight Group, and Betts
Cove and Tilt Cove Ophiolite (modified from Zagorevski et al., 2012; after Hibbard et al., 2006).
7
2.2 Regional geology of the BMC
The Northern Miramichi Highlands (NMH) consists of four different tectonic
blocks: Fournier, California Lake, Tetagouche, and Sheephouse Brook, all of which host
the felsic-silisiclastic VMS deposits of the BMC (Figure 2; van Staal et al., 2003). The
blocks, each having their own volcano-sedimentary stratigraphy, represent widely separated
ensialic to ensimatic portions of the Tetagouche-Exploits back-arc basin, formed during the
Arenig-Caradoc (van Staal et al., 2003). The present spatial distribution of the tectonic
blocks is known as the Brunswick subduction complex and is the product of the Ashgill-
Ludlow closure of the Tetagouche-Exploits back-arc basin (Goodfellow and McCutcheon,
2003). The Elmtree-Belledune inlier (EBI), located to the north-east of the NMH, exposes
small portions of the Ordovician Fournier block through a Silurian sedimentary cover. It is
separated to the south from the extensively mineralized rocks of the NMH by a strip of
fault-bound Silurian turbidites and molasse along the Rocky Brook Millstream fault zone
(van Staal et al., 1990).
2.2.1 Northern Miramichi Highlands
The California Lake block consists of the rocks of the California Lake and the
Miramichi groups. The Miramichi Group consists mostly of passive margin sediments, and
forms the stratigraphic basement of each of the blocks in the NMH. The California Lake
Group consists of Middle to Upper Arenig rhyolitic to dacitic porphyritic tuffs and flows of
the Mount Brittain and Spruce Lake formations (Gower, 1995), as well as pillow basalts of
the Canoe Landing Lake Formation (Rogers and van Staal, 2003). All three are overlain by
the Boucher Brook Formation, which consists of aklalic basalts, cherts, shales, and
siltstones (van Staal and Rogers, 2000). The Mount Britain Formation hosts the Murray
Brook and Restigouche VMS deposits, whereas the Spruce Lake Formation hosts the
Caribou VMS deposit.
8
The Tetagouche block is composed of the rocks of the Tetagouche and Miramichi
groups (van Staal et al., 2003). From base to top, the Tetagouche Group consists of the
Nepisiguit Falls, Flat Landing Brook, Little River, and Tomogonops formations. The
Nepisiguit Falls Formation is characterized by porphyritic dacitic to rhyolitic tuffs,
sandstones, and shales. It hosts the largest massive sulfide deposits of the BMC (Brunswick
12, Heath Steele, Half Mile Lake), as well as spatially associated semi-continuous iron
formations that are thought to have formed during a period of volcanic quiescence (Peter
and Goodfellow, 1996). The Nepisiguit Falls Formation is overlain by the Flat Landing
Brook Formation, which is characterized by feldspar-porphyritic dacitic to rhyolitic flows
and pyroclastic rocks interlayered with tholeiitic pillow basalts (van Staal et al., 2003).
Aside from the Stratmat and Taylor Brook VMS deposits, the Flat Landing Brook
Formation is not known to host significant massive sulfides. The Flat Landing Brook
Formation is overlain by the Little River Formation, which is composed of shales,
siltstones, and cherts with interlayered transitional to alkalic pillow basalts. The Little River
Formation is in turn overlain by the Tomogonops Formation, composed of calcareous
shales, lithic wackes, and conglomerates.
The Sheephouse Brook block forms the southern portion of the BMC. It consists
mostly of sedimentary rocks of the Miramichi Group and less abundant volcanic rocks of
the Sheephouse Brook Group (van Staal et al., 2003). The Sheephouse Brook Group is
subdivided, in stratigraphic order, into the Clearwater Stream, Sevogle River, and Slacks
Lake formations. The Clearwater Stream Formation is composed of feldspar-porphyritic
dacitic tuffs, and hosts the Chester VMS deposit (Fyffe, 1995). The Sevogle River
Formation consists of felsic volcanic rocks and hosts small semi-massive sulfide deposits
(Wilson and Fyffe, 1996). The Slacks Lake Formation is characterized by transitional to
alkalic pillow basalts and Fe-Mn rich shales. Stratigraphic correlations can be established in
certain intervals between the volcanic rocks of the Sheephouse Brook Group and those of
the Tetagouche and California Lake Groups (van Staal et al., 2003).
9
The Fournier block of the NMH is comprised of the Upper Proterozoic to Lower
Cambrian Upsalquitch gabbro and of sedimentary and mafic igneous rocks of the Fournier
Group (van Staal et al, 1996). The Fournier Group is subdivided into the Sormany and
Millstream Formations. The Sormany Formation is characterized by pillow basalts with
mid-ocean ridge basalt (MORB) to island-arc basalt (IAB) affinities, as well as by
synvolcanic gabbros and serpentinites. The Sormany basalts are overlain by the shales and
sandstones of the Millstream Formation. The Millstream Formation hosts the Nicholas-
Denys Zn-Pb-Ag massive sulfide deposit, interpreted to be a SEDEX deposit by Deakin
(2011). The Fournier Group preserved in the NMH represents a transitional crust compared
to the Fournier Group in the EBI, which is interpreted to represent remnants of back-arc
oceanic crust (van Staal et al., 2003; Winchester et al., 1992).
2.2.2 Elmtree-Belledune Inlier (EBI)
The Turgeon VMS deposit is hosted by the volcano-sedimentary rocks of the EBI
(Figures 2, 3). The rocks of the EBI belong to the Fournier Group and Elmtree Formation
(Figure 3; van Staal et al., 1990; van Staal and Fyffe, 1991b). The volcanic and sedimentary
rocks of the Elmtree Formation are compositionally and lithologically similar to those of
the Boucher Brook Formation of the California Lake Group (van Staal et al. 1990). The
tectonic contact between the Fournier Group and Elmtree Formation is marked by a 1-2 km
wide black shale melange (Figure 3; Winchester et al. 1992).
The Fournier Group in the EBI consists of the Pointe Verte and Devereaux
formations. The Pointe Verte Formation, which is divided into a lower sedimentary unit
(Prairie Brook Member) and an upper volcanic-dominated unit (Madran Member;
Winchester et al. 1992), is overlain by the Devereaux Formation (Winchester et al. 1992).
The Devereaux Formation consists of tholeiitic basalts, andesites, wackes and shales, all of
which are intruded by the Black Point gabbro (Winchester et al. 1992). The Sormany
Formation in the NMH correlates with the Devereaux and Pointe Verte formations of the
Fournier Group in the EBI (Winchester et al., 1992)
10
Figure 2 : Regional geological map of the BMC and EBI illustrating the main tectonic blocks and ore
deposits of the area (Deakin, 2011; Modified from van Staal et al., 2003).
11
The Turgeon Cu-Zn VMS deposit is hosted in the Belledune tholeiite suite of the
Devereaux Formation, which is subdivided into the Duncans Brook, Belledune, and
Devereaux tholeiitic suites (Figure 3; Winchester et al., 1992). The Devereaux Formation is
intruded by the Black Point gabbro; a subalkalic, high-field strength element (HFSE)
depleted unit with an island-arc tholeiite (IAT) affinity (Winchester et al,. 1992). The
Devereaux and Belledune tholeiites are composed of primitive Cr-rich pillow basalts and
andesites that share MORB-like and IAT affinities. The Belledune tholeiites can be
distinguished from the Devereaux tholeiites by their lower Mg, Cr, and Ni and higher Fe,
Ti and V contents (Winchester et al., 1992). The Devereaux and Belledune tholeiites have
similar Zr/Y and Nb/Y ratios, MORB affinities, as well as similar REE and multi-element
profiles, indicating that they are cogenetic (Winchester et al., 1992). The Duncan’s Brook
tholeiites occur at the highest stratigraphic level directly above the Belledune suite and are
considered the youngest unit in the Fournier Group based on the fact that it intrudes
underlying lithologies (Winchester et al., 1992). The rocks of the Duncan’s Brook tholeiite
have MORB and IAT affinities (Winchester et al., 1992).
Figure 3 : Geologic map of the Elmtree-Belledune inlier (EBI). Modified after Winchester et al., (1992).
12
2.3 Analytical methods
Whole rock major and trace elements of 42 fresh and altered igneous rocks were
analysed at Activation Laboratories, Ancaster, Ontario. Samples were analyzed by
inductively coupled plasma emission spectroscopy (ICP-ES) and inductively coupled
plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS), and were prepared with a lithium
metaborate/tetraborate fusion. The fused material was dissolved in nitric acid. The solution
was then analyzed for major, trace, REE, and other metals using a combination of ICP-ES
and ICP-MS. Whole rock major and trace elements of 11 sulfide samples were measured
using instrumental neutron activation analysis (INAA), total digestion inductively coupled
plasma (TD-ICP-OES), and total digestion inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry
(TD-MS) at Activation Laboratories, Ancaster, Ontario.
Chlorite and sulfide mineral compositions were measured using a 5 WDS
CAMECA SX-100 electron microprobe at Université Laval, Québec, Canada. The
microprobe operating conditions were 15 kV and 20 nA with counting times of 20 s on
peak and 10 s on background. Natural and synthetic standards were used for calibration.
Sulfur isotope analyses of pyrite, chalcopyrite, pyrrhotite and sphalerite were
conducted at the G.G. Hatch Isotope Laboratory, University of Ottawa, Canada. For each
analysis, 30 mg of sulfide concentrates were prepared under a binocular microscope.
Samples were mixed with tungstic oxide and flash combusted at 1800°C in an elemental
analyser. SO2 gas was analysed using the Thermo Finnigan Delta XP isotope ratio mass
spectrometer. Analytical precision is ± 0.2‰. Sulfur isotope ratios are presented in δ-
notation relative to Vienna-Canyon Diablo Troilite (V-CDT).
13
2.4 Geology of the Turgeon deposit
The Turgeon deposit area is divided into three blocks that are separated by steeply
dipping, east-west striking faults that post-date all lithological units in the area. The faults
are interpreted to be post-volcanic and related to Devonian wrench faulting attributed to the
Rocky-Brook Millstream Fault zone (Figure 4; Thurlow, 1993). The North block and the
western portion of the Powerline block are composed of a rhyolitic unit characterized by
pink perlitic fractures with interstitial chlorite (Figure 4). The rhyolite unit is interpreted to
overlie the sheeted dykes and pillow basalts. The Powerline block is characterized by post-
mineralization gabbros that intrude all of the units in the block. The gabbro is
geochemically similar to the sheeted dykes and pillow basalts, and is included in the
Belledune tholeiite suite (Winchester et al., 1992; Figure 3). Numerous, east-west striking,
late gabbro dykes of the Duncan’s Brook tholeiite (Figure 3) intrude all lithologies.
The rocks in the south-west portion of the deposit consist of an east-west trending
sheeted-dyke complex (Figure 4). The sheeted-dyke complex is overlain by steeply dipping
westward facing pillow basalts interlayered with thin horizons of normally graded quartz-
rich sandstones and interpillow quartz-jasper-pyrite veins (Thurlow, 1993). The pillow
basalts contain abundant varioles, quench fractures, and inter-pillow breccia along pillow
margins. Basalts are characterized by a medium-dark grey colour with minor quartz-calcite-
epidote veining, and variable amounts of magnetite. Hyaloclastic and amygdular basalt
commonly occur in the pillow basalt unit. The sheeted dykes and pillow basalts are part of
the Belledune tholeiite suite of Winchester et al. (1992) (Figures 3 and 4).
14
Figure 4 : Geologic map of the Turgeon deposit. Schematic cross-section through FT-11-04 is shown in
Figure 10. Cross section through A2 is shown in Figure 6. This study and Thurlow (1992).
2.4.1 Least altered basalt, andesite, and rhyolite
The footwall basalts and andesites of the Turgeon deposit, distal to mineralization,
have generally undergone lower-greenschist metamorphism (van Staal et al., 1991). Least
altered basalt and andesite at Turgeon have preserved primary volcanic textures, and are
composed of plagioclase and quartz microcrystals in a matrix of volcanic glass with minor
epidote – quartz – carbonate veins (Figure 5A). Quartz, chlorite, and calcite commonly
infill amygdules or form pseudomorphs after primary clinopyroxene phenocrysts. In the
basalts, plagioclase microcrystals account for 60% of the rock whereas quartz microcrystals
account for 5%. Both are found in a matrix of volcanic glass, which forms 25% of the rock.
In the andesitic rocks, quartz microcrystals account for 25% of the rock, whereas
plagioclase occupies 65% of the rock in a matrix of volcanic glass (10%). In both the
basaltic and andesitic least altered rocks, plagioclase micro-crystals commonly display
patches of sericite. Macroscopically, rhyolite is light pink in color and is characterized by
flow banding outlined by perlitic fractures. Quartz microcrystals account for 80% of the
rock, whereas plagioclase microcrystals form 10% of the rock. Both are cemented by a
matrix of volcanic glass altered to chlorite, which occupies the remaining 10% of the rock.
15
2.4.2 Basalt and andesite epidote alteration
Some of the basaltic and andesitic rocks hosting the deposit have undergone
pervasive epidote alteration. The rocks affected by epidote alteration have preserved
primary volcanic textures, and contain on average 60% plagioclase microcrystals, 20%
epidote, 10% calcite, 5% chlorite, and 5% quartz (Figure 5B). The volcanic glass matrix is
altered to epidote and minor chlorite, and is cut by coarse-grained epidote–calcite veins.
The epidote alteration facies is distal to mineralization.
Figure 5 : Least and most altered rocks at Turgeon. Pl = plagioclase, Qz = quartz, Ep = epidote, Cal = calcite,
Chl = chlorite, Py = pyrite, Ccp = chalcopyrite A. Photomicrograph of least altered andesite. B.
Photomicrograph of epidote altered basalt. C. Photomicrograph of chlorite-pyrite altered basalt. D. Chlorite
altered basalt with chalcopyrite veins in the stockwork zone.
16
2.4.3 Basalt and andesite chlorite alteration
With increasing proximity of mineralization, the volcanic rocks display a
progressively more intense chlorite alteration. Macroscopically, basalt and andesite affected
by intense chlorite alteration are soft and black in color (Figure 5C). The most altered rocks
of the Turgeon deposit have a mineral assemblage composed of 65% chlorite, 20% quartz,
10% chalcopyrite, and 5% pyrite (Figure 5D), and are found proximal to mineralization
(Figure 6). When compared to least altered basalt and andesite, the intense chlorite
alteration zone displays partial to total replacement of plagioclase and volcanic glass by
chlorite and quartz. Primary volcanic textures are not preserved. Quartz forms phenocrysts,
veins, and pseudomorphs for primary pyroxene phenocrysts. Pyrite is disseminated in the
matrix or forms veins. Chalcopyrite forms veins that can reach thicknesses of up to 5 cm.
Chalcopyrite veins increase in abundance stratigraphically below massive sulfide lenses, in
the stockwork zone in chlorite altered basalt and andesite (Figure 6).
Figure 6 : Cross-section through A2 from Figure 4. The “48-49” massive sulfide lens is located in the
Southern block, near the contact between the pillow basalts and sheeted dykes (Figure 4). The massive sulfide
and stockwork zones occur in amygdaloidal and hyaloclastic volcanic rocks.
17
2.4.4 Lithogeochemistry
On a Zr/Ti - Nb/Y diagram, the footwall volcanic rocks of the Turgeon deposit plot
into the fields of subalkaline basalt and andesite (Figure 7A). The hanging wall rhyolite
flows of the North block plot in the subalkaline rhyolite field. On a Y-Zr diagram (Figure
7B), basalt and andesite show a tholeiitic affinity, whereas rhyolite plots in the tholeiitic
and transitional fields at high Zr content. Rare earth element (REE) patterns for basalt and
andesite are flat, similar to those typical of MORBs (Figure 8A). Footwall volcanic rocks
that have undergone intense chloritization show pronounced negative Eu anomalies, and are
enriched in REE relative to least-altered rocks (Figure 8B). The hanging wall rhyolites have
slightly fractionated REE patterns, display negative Eu anomalies, and are enriched in REE
relative to least-altered basalt and andesite (Figure 8C). Multi-element plots show that least
altered basalt, andesite, and rhyolite have weak negative Nb – Ta anomalies, suggesting a
volcanic-arc signature (Figure 8D). Rhyolite from the Flat Landing Brook (FLB) Formation
of the BMC displays a fractionated REE pattern and pronounced Nb – Ta anomaly (Figure
8D).
On a Zr/Y - Zr diagram (Pearce and Norry, 1979), footwall volcanic rocks plot
dominantly in the MORB field (Figure 9A). On a ternary Nb-Zr-Y diagram (Meschede,
1986), least-altered and altered volcanic rocks plot mainly in the N-MORB field, with some
samples plotting in the within-plate tholeiite field (WP thol; Figure 9B). The trend of
within-plate tholeiite to N-MORB suggests that the most likely tectonic environment was
that of volcanic-arc basalts (VAB). On a ternary La-Nb-Y diagram (Cabanis and Lecolle,
1989), volcanic rocks plot in the back-arc basin and volcanic-arc tholeiite (VAT) fields
(Figure 9C). On a (La/Yb) cn – Yb diagram (Lesher et al., 1986; revised by Hart et al.,
2004), Turgeon’s hanging wall rhyolite plots in the field for FIIIa type rhyolites, whereas
the Flat Landing Brook (FLB) rhyolite of the NMH plots in the FII field. (Figure 9D). FIIIa
type rhyolites are commonly associated to VMS deposits, whereas most FII type rhyolites
are not (Lesher et al., 1986; revised by Hart et al., 2004).
18
Figure 7 : Geochemistry of the volcanic rocks of the Turgeon deposit. A. Zr/Ti - Nb/Y diagram (Winchester
and Floyd, 1977; as modified by Pearce, 1996). B. Zr-Y diagram (Ross and Bédard, 2009; as modified by
Barrett and MacLean, 1999).
19
Figure 8 : Trace element composition of the Turgeon volcanic rocks normalized to chondrite (McDonough
and Sun, 1995). A. REE in least-altered basalt and andesite. B. REE in chlorite altered basalt and andesite. C.
REE in rhyolite. D. Multi-element spider diagram of Turgeon least-altered basalt, andesite, and rhyolite, as
well as rhyolite from the Flat Landing Brook (FLB) Formation of the BMC (Mean values of 34 samples;
Lentz, 1999) normalized to chondrite (Thompson, 1982).
20
Figure 9 : Tectonic affinity discrimination diagrams for the Turgeon mafic and felsic volcanic rocks. A. Zr/Y
- Zr diagram (Pearce and Norry, 1979). B. Nb*2 - Zr/4 - Y ternary diagram (Meschede, 1986). C. La/10- Nb/8
- Y/15 ternary diagram (Cabanis and Lecolle, 1989). D. (La/Yb) cn – Yb cn (Lesher et al., 1986; as modified
by Hart et al., 2004). BMC Rhyolite (FLB) values from Lentz, 1999 (Mean values of 34 samples). Chondrite
values from Nakamura (1974).
2.5 Cu-Zn VMS mineralization of the Turgeon deposit
Mineralization at the Turgeon deposit consists of two sulfide stockwork zones
stratigraphically underlying two massive sulfide lenses (Figure 10). The Powerline and
Beaver Pond zones crop out whereas the “100m Zinc” and “48-49” massive sulfide lenses
are found exclusively in drill core. The Powerline and “100m Zinc” zones are in the
Powerline block, whereas the “48-49” and Beaver Pond zones are located in the Southern
block (Figure 4). The sulfide lenses are at the contact between the sheeted dykes and pillow
basalt units. Massive sulfides are hosted in hyaloclastic basalt flows, interstitial to chlorite
altered volcanic glass fragments. Amygdules in the pillow basalts directly overlying
mineralization are commonly filled by quartz, calcite, pyrite, and chalcopyrite.
21
The Beaver Pond zone consists of variolitic pillow lavas with abundant interpillow
jasper-epidote-pyrite veins and hyaloclastite breccia. Mineralization forms quartz-pyrite
veins with minor chalcopyrite, chalcocite, bornite, and sphalerite, which cross cut a 4 m by
7 m massive, saucer-shaped body of jasper. Drilling indicates that mineralization does not
extend at depth (Thurlow, 1993).
Figure 10 : Schematic cross-section through FT-11-04 illustrating the distribution of mineralization and
hydrothermal alteration. The Powerline stockwork zone grades abruptly into the “100m Zinc” massive sulfide
lens. The “48-49” massive sulfide lens is stratigraphically underlain by the “48-49” pyrite-chalcopyrite
stockwork zone.
The Powerline zone crops out in the Powerline block (Figures 4, 10, 11) and
consists of a network of chalcopyrite-pyrite veins cutting intensely chloritized basalt and
andesite (Figure 5D). On surface, the Powerline zone is manifested by east-west oriented
22
elongated pyrite-chlorite sulfide lenses bordered by basalt (Figure 12A). A distinctive
massive sulfide breccia unit at the north of the outcrop consists of angular to sub-rounded,
poorly sorted, sulfide (Figure 12B) and amygdular basalt fragments (Figure 12C) up to 20
cm in diameter, cemented in a pyrite-chlorite-silica matrix (Figure 12D). Sulfide fragments
consist of pyrite, chalcopyrite, and sphalerite. An east-west trending gabbro truncates the
sulfide breccia at the north side of the block (Figure 11). East-west trending gabbroic dykes
that intrude basalts in the area are not mineralized or significantly altered.
Figure 11 : Geologic map of the Powerline showing.
The “100m Zn” massive sulfide lens is in the Powerline block (Figures 4, 10). The
lens strikes east-west and is considerably sheared and dismembered by the “100m Zinc”
fault (Figure 10; Thurlow, 1993). The lens has a maximum thickness of 50 m and extends
150 m along strike. The chalcopyrite-pyrite stockwork zone partially exposed on the
Powerline block grades abruptly into a massive sulfide lens at depth (Figure 10). The “48-
49” zone is found in the southern block (Figure 4, 10), at the contact between the sheeted
dyke complex and the overlying pillow basalts (Figure 6). The massive sulfide lens strikes
N-S, and dips steeply to the west. The "48-49” zone consists of chalcopyrite-pyrite veins in
23
a stockwork zone that comes in abrupt contact with a massive sulfide lens (Figure 10). The
lens has a maximum thickness of 40 m.
Figure 12 : A. Elongated north-south striking massive sulfide lenses bordered by moderately silicified basalts
containing disseminated pyrite. B. Large pyrite fragment cemented by a matrix of fragmental massive sulfide.
C. Large amygdular basalt fragment cemented by a matrix of fragmental massive sulfide. D. Poorly sorted,
angular to rounded pyrite fragments cemented by a chlorite – silica matrix.
24
A historic resource (not NI-43-101 compliant) at Turgeon has been estimated at 2.5
Mt grading 1.5% Cu and 4.0% Zn (Kettles, 1987). Massive sulfides at Turgeon have low
concentrations of Pb (30.1 ± 23.8 ppm; Appendix 4), Au (<2 ppb; Appendix 4), Ag (3.67 ±
3.43 ppm; Appendix 4), and Cd (5 ± 5 ppm; Appendix 4), but are enriched in Co (295 ±
255 ppm) and Se (156 ± 92 ppm). On a ternary Cu – Zn - Pb diagram, Turgeon massive and
stockwork sulfides plot dominantly along the Cu - Zn axis. The massive sulfides of the
BMC plot along the Zn-Pb axis, whereas stockwork sulfides plot near the Cu pole (Figure
13).
Figure 13 : Cu – Zn – Pb ternary diagram of massive sulfides from: a. Turgeon deposit. b. deposits of the
BMC (Modified after Goodfellow and McCutcheon, 2003). Contour values are number of samples.
25
2.6 Hydrothermal sulfide facies
2.6.1 Chalcopyrite-pyrite stockwork
The chalcopyrite-pyrite stockwork is characterized by an assemblage of
chalcopyrite, pyrite, chlorite, quartz, and calcite. Quartz, pyrite, and chalcopyrite form cm-
sized veins cutting black, chloritized basalt (Figure 14A). Pyrite is brecciated; it forms
rounded to sub-angular fragments of various sizes, and is partially replaced by chalcopyrite
(Figure 15A). Pyrite and chalcopyrite vary in abundance with increasing proximity of
massive sulfide lenses. Stockworks immediately underlying massive sulfide lenses are
dominated by chalcopyrite, whereas adjacent zones are richer in pyrite. Pyrite distal to
massive sulfide lenses is not brecciated. Rather, it forms mm-sized euhedral cubes in veins
or disseminated in the host rock. Bulk rock analysis shows that the chalcopyrite-pyrite
stockwork has high concentrations of Co (up to 705 ppm), Se (up to 325 ppm), and In (up
to 53.6 ppm; Appendix 4), all of which display a covariation with Cu (Figures 16A, 16B,
16C).
2.6.2 Massive chalcopyrite-pyrrhotite ± pyrite
The massive chalcopyrite-pyrrhotite zone is characterized by an assemblage of
chalcopyrite, pyrrhotite, chlorite, and pyrite, with minor quartz and magnetite (Figures 14B,
15B). Massive chalcopyrite-pyrrhotite is found at the base of the “48-49” massive sulfide
lens (Figure 10). Similarly to stockwork ore, pyrite in this sulfide facies is brecciated and
forms rounded to sub-angular fragments. Pyrite fragments are cemented by chalcopyrite
and pyrrhotite, with minor magnetite. The gangue minerals include chlorite, with minor
quartz and magnetite. Bulk rock analysis shows that the massive chalcopyrite-pyrrhotite
has high concentrations in Se (up to 245 ppm) and Co (up to 788 ppm; Appendix 4).
26
2.6.3 Massive pyrite
The massive pyrite zone is characterized by pyrite with minor amounts of siderite,
calcite, and magnetite (Figures 14D and 15C). Massive pyrite is found exclusively in the
central and upper part of the “48-49” massive sulfide lens. Pyrite is typically coarse grained
and euhedral, forming cm-scale cubes. Pyrite is most commonly cemented by calcite,
siderite, and talc, with minor magnetite and chlorite. Bulk rock analysis shows that the
massive pyrite has low concentrations of Co (up to 162 ppm), Se (up to 117 ppm), and In
(up to 2.7 ppm; Appendix 4).
2.6.4 Pyrite-chalcopyrite-sphalerite breccia
The breccia zone is composed of 70% fragments and 30% matrix. Brecciated
fragments are rounded to sub-angular, and consist of 65% pyrite, 20% basalt, 5%
chalcopyrite, and 10% sphalerite (Figure 14C). Basalt fragments include amygdular basalt
(Figure 12C) and intensely chlorite-altered basalt. The matrix consists of quartz, chlorite,
calcite, siderite, talc, chalcopyrite and sphalerite. The chalcopyrite and sphalerite in the
matrix are anhedral and are commonly found within fractures in pyrite fragments.
Sphalerite contains small chalcopyrite inclusions. The pyrite-chalcopyrite-sphalerite breccia
is located at the base of the “100m Zinc” lens (Figure 10), as well as on the northern
portion of the Powerline showing (Figure 11). Bulk rock analysis shows that the the pyrite-
chalcopyrite-sphalerite breccia ore has the highest concentrations of Cd (up to 16.4 ppm;
Appendix 4), which displays a covariation with Zn (Figure 16D).
27
Figure 14 : Drill core samples of different ore types at Turgeon. Py = pyrite, Ccp = chalcopyrite, Sp =
sphalerite, Chl = chlorite, Qz = quartz, Po = pyrrhotite A. Chalcopyrite-pyrite stockwork ore. B. Massive
chalcopyrite-pyrrhotite ore. C. Sphalerite-pyrite. D. Massive pyrite. E. Pyrite stockwork. F. Massive
chalcopyrite-pyrite.
28
Figure 15 : Photomicrographs of the four main sulfide facies at Turgeon. Py = pyrite, Ccp = chalcopyrite, Po
= pyrrhotite, Mag = magnetite, Cb = carbonate, Sp = sphalerite, Tlc = talc. A. Rounded pyrite breccia
cemented by a matrix of chalcopyrite, stockwork zone. B. Coexisting pyrrhotite and chalcopyrite in the
massive Cpy-Po ore at the bottom of massive aulfide lenses. C. Coarse euhedral to subhedral pyrite cemented
by a matrix of calcite, siderite, and magnetite, massive pyrite ore zone located at the top of “48-49” massive
sulfide lens. D. Fragmental ore comprised of sphalerite and pyrite breccia cemented by a matrix of talc.
2.7 Sulfide chemistry and textures The four principal sulfide minerals at Turgeon are pyrite, chalcopyrite, pyrrhotite,
and sphalerite. Electron microprobe analyses were performed on 16 polished sections.
Sulfide microprobe data are presented in appendices 5, 6, 7 and 8.
2.7.1 Pyrite
Pyrite at the Turgeon deposit varies in grain size and morphology from fine-grained
(100-600 µm), brecciated, sub-rounded to angular fragments in the stockwork zones
(Figures 14A and 15A), to coarsely crystalline (up to 1 cm) euhedral cubes in the massive
pyrite zones (Figures 14D and 15C). Coarse grained pyrite in pyrite-chalcopyrite-sphalerite
breccia is also fragmented and is 5 mm – 5 cm in size (Figure 14C). Euhedral pyrite in
29
massive pyrite zones contain chalcopyrite, sphalerite, and magnetite inclusions <1 µm in
size, whereas fragmental pyrite in the pyrite-chalcopyrite-sphalerite breccia zone is devoid
of inclusions. Pyrite in massive pyrite contains up to 0.14 wt% Pb (Appendix 5). Pyrite in
stockwork and massive chalcopyrite zones contains up to 0.8 wt% Co, 0.14 wt% Se, and
0.34 wt% Cu (Appendix 5). Pyrite yields concentrations below the detection limits for As,
Ag, and Ni (Appendix 5).
2.7.2 Chalcopyrite
Chalcopyrite mainly occurs as very fine (<100 µm) anhedral aggregates in veins
cementing and replacing pyrite (Figure 15A), and is commonly intergrown with pyrrhotite
(Figure 15B), quartz and chlorite. Rounded chalcopyrite fragments (<0.5 mm), although
rare, are found in the fragmental sulfide facies. Chalcopyrite also occurs as sub-rounded
inclusions (<20 µm) within sphalerite fragments in pyrite-chalcopyrite-sphalerite breccia.
Chalcopyrite is stoichiometric, and contains very few detectable trace elements. In the
stockwork zone, chalcopyrite contains up to 0.1 wt% Se, 0.16 wt% Zn, and 0.1 wt% Pb
(Appendix 6). In massive chalcopyrite-pyrrhotite, chalcopyrite contains up to 0.1 wt% Pb,
and yields concentrations below the detection limits for Co, Mn, Ni, Ag, and Se (Appendix
6).
2.7.3 Pyrrhotite
Pyrrhotite is found exclusively at the base of the “48-49” massive sulfide lens. It
mainly forms anhedral aggregates and is intergrown with chalcopyrite (Figures 14B, 15B).
With chalcopyrite, pyrrhotite cements and replaces pyrite in breccia. Pyrrhotite is
intergrown with magnetite, and forms veins that cut chlorite and quartz veins. Inclusions of
chalcopyrite and magnetite in pyrrhotite are <1 µm in diameter and are irregular in form.
Pyrrhotite contains up to 0.15 wt% Co, 0.09 wt% Se, 0.15 wt% Zn, 0.12 wt% Cu, and 0.15
wt% Pb, and yields concentrations below the detection limits for Mn, Ni, and Ag
(Appendix 7).
30
2.7.4 Sphalerite
Sphalerite forms massive anhedral aggregates and massive sub-rounded fragments
in pyrite-chalcopyrite-sphalerite breccia. Sphalerite is intergrown with chalcopyrite in the
massive pyrite ore, where it cements pyrite cubes and fractures. In the pyrite-chalcopyrite-
sphalerite breccia, it forms mm- to cm- scale, sub-rounded fragments (Figure 14C), and
small anhedral aggregates cementing pyrite. Sphalerite fragments occasinally contain
irregular inclusions of chalcopyrite (<20 µm) typical of the chalcopyrite disease texture.
Sphalerite has a range in Fe content between 2 - 6 wt%, and contains up to 0.2 wt% Cd and
0.15 wt% Bi (Appendix 8).
Figure 16 : Cu, Zn, and trace element binary diagrams by type of sulfide mineralization. A. Cu (ppm) vs. In
(ppm). B. Cu (ppm) vs. Se (ppm). C. Cu (ppm) vs. Co (ppm). D. Zn (ppm) vs. Cd (ppm).
31
2.8 Alteration geochemistry
Fresh and altered samples in this section were selected based on their macroscopic
characteristics, such as colour and hardness. Petrographic thin sections were also made for
each sample in order to verify their respective classification.
A TiO2-Zr diagram for the Turgeon footwall volcanic rocks shows two alteration
arrays that project through the origin (Figure 17). The alteration arrays intersect the
tholeiitic fractionation trend at a composition typical for basalt and andesite. Samples that
plot near the tholeiitic fractionation trend are least altered. Samples plotting above the
tholeiitic fractionation trend have undergone mass loss, whereas those that plot beneath
have undergone mass gain. The majority of the volcanic rocks from the Turgeon deposit
plot above the tholeiitic fractionation trend, indicating mass loss in most samples. Chlorite
altered samples tend to plot at higher Zr and TiO2 values above the trend, indicating they
have lost the most mass during alteration. The hanging wall rhyolite has high Zr and low Ti
values, plotting along the unaltered tholeiitic trend.
Figure 17 : Zr – TiO2 diagram showing Turgeon deposit rock composition with reference to the fractionation
trend of normal volcanic rocks. Alteration lines (dashed) pass through the origin (after MacLean and Barrett,
1993). Highlighted samples are those used in figure 20.
32
Mass changes in mobile elements are illustrated in figure 18 following MacLean
and Barrett’s (1993) multiple precursor method. Mass changes for one element are
calculated based on the respective basaltic or andesitic precursor. Least altered basalt and
andesite show minor depletions in both CaO + Na2O (0 and -3 wt%) and FeO + MgO, (0
and -5 wt%; Figure 18). Epidote altered basalt and andesite are characterized by CaO gains
(up to 4 wt%) and FeO + MgO depletion (Figure 18). Samples affected by intense chlorite-
pyrite alteration show a different pattern, where Na2O + CaO is more depleted (between -5
wt% and -7 wt%), whereas FeO + MgO is enriched (0 and +12 wt%; Figure 18). Gradual
replacement of feldspar by chlorite is shown by mass losses in CaO and Na2O, and mass
gains in FeO and MgO (Figure 18).
Figure 18 : Elemental mass changes in the footwall volcanics of the Turgeon deposit. Rocks distal from
mineralization that exhibit epidote alteration have gains in Na and Ca, and losses in Fe and Mg. Rocks
proximal to mineralization that have undergone chlorite alteration have lost Na and Ca, and gained Fe and Mg
(after MacLean and Barrett, 1993).
The alteration box plot (Figure 19) is a diagram that uses two geochemical alteration
indices, the Ishikawa alteration index (AI) and the chlorite-carbonate-pyrite index (CCPI),
in order to characterize the nature and degree of alteration in VMS deposits (Large et al.,
2001). Least altered rocks plot in the center of the diagram, whereas hydrothermally altered
33
samples plot in varying positions depending on the types of hydrothermal alteration
minerals. The AI is useful to monitor the breakdown of plagioclase feldspars and their
replacement by chlorite and sericite. The CCPI is useful to distinguish chlorite from
sericite-rich alteration, and to characterize carbonate alteration. Least altered basalt and
andesite from the Turgeon deposit plot in the Least Altered Box with AI and CCPI values
ranging between 25-65 and 70-85, respectively (Figure 19). Altered basalt and andesite
with increased chlorite-pyrite alteration plot towards the pyrite-chlorite pole (Figure 19).
Rocks with higher AI and CCPI show partial to complete feldspar replacement by chlorite.
Rhyolite is not altered.
Figure 19 : Alteration box plot of the Turgeon deposit rocks showing a dominantly chlorite-pyrite
hydrothermal trend. Least-altered basalt and andesite plot in the least altered box, whereas chlorite altered
samples plot towards the chlorite-pyrite end-member with increasing alteration intensity (after Large et al.,
2001).
34
Figure 20 : Grant (1986) isocon diagrams of basalt and andesite affected by chlorite alterations at Turgeon A.
Comparison of representative chlorite alteration (J344813) with least altered basalt (J344817) samples. B.
Comparison of representative chlorite alteration (J344347) with least altered andesite (EL-22) samples. The
isocon line is drawn through immobile elements.
35
Mass gains and losses during chlorite-pyrite alteration are quantified by using Grant
(1986) isocon diagrams (Figure 20). Least altered andesite and basalt precursors plot close
to the tholeiitic fractionation trend (Figure 17). In chlorite altered samples, REEs are
immobile and plot along the line of constant mass that defines the isocon. Chlorite altered
samples are enriched in Mn, LOI, Fe, and Mg, and are depleted in Al, Si, Ca, Eu, and Na
(Figure 20). Chlorite altered samples show mass losses of up to 35% that increase with
proximity to mineralization in the massive sulfide lenses.
2.8.1 Chlorite geothermometry
Chlorite in footwall volcanic rocks of the Turgeon deposit has Fe / (Fe + Mg) ratios
ranging from 0.38 to 0.70 (Figure 21; Appendix 9). Stockwork zone chlorite is dark-green
in color and is bluish-gray in polarized light. It has Fe / (F e + Mg) ratios between 0.5 and
0.7, with an average SiIV
site occupancy of 2.7 and plots in the field for ripidolite (Figure
21). Chlorite from massive and breccia sulfides is light-green in color, and greenish gray in
cross-polarized light. It has lower Fe / (F e + Mg) ratios (0.50 - 0.38) and higher SiIV
site
occupancy (2.83 - 2.92), plotting in the pycnochlorite field (Figure 21). The silicon and
aluminum tetrahedral occupancy sites for all chlorites range between Si2.7 Al1.3 and
Si2.93Al1.07. Using Cathelineau’s (1988) chlorite geothermometer, which stipulates that Si
substitution for Al in chlorite tetrahedral sites is temperature dependant, calculated
temperatures range from 329 - 361°C for stockwork chlorite (340 ± 12°C, n=11), whereas
chlorite in the massive sulfide and sulfide breccia zones yield lower temperatures ranging
from 246 - 286°C (266±20°C, n=6) and of 249 and 267°C, respectively (Figure 22;
Appendix 9).
36
Figure 21 : Chlorite classification diagram which plots Fe / (Fe+ Mg) vs Si cations (Hey, 1954).
Figure 22 : Calculated temperatures using the AlIV
chlorite geothermometer of Cathelineau (1988).
37
2.9 Sulfur Isotope Geochemistry
The δ34
S value of sulfides at Turgeon ranges between 6.2 – 10.0‰ for pyrite (n=12,
average=7.1‰), 5.8 – 8.9 for chalcopyrite (n=9, average=6.7‰), 6.4 and 6.7‰ for
sphalerite, and 5.9 for pyrrhotite (Figure 23; Appendix 10). Co-existing pyrite and
chalcopyrite in the stockwork zone yield S isotope equilibrium temperatures ranging from
397 to 787°C using Kajiwara and Krouse (1971). Co-existing pyrite and sphalerite in the
sulfide breccia yield temperatures from 304 - 726°C using Kajiwara and Krouse (1971).
Outlying temperatures to 787°C are geologically unreasonable considering the low
metamorphic grade at the deposit. Although temperatures are partly consistent with VMS
environments, the calculated temperatures likely indicate isotope disequilibrium
considering pyrite and chalcopyrite are not in textural equilibrium.
Figure 23 : δ34
S values for pyrite, chalcopyrite, sphalerite, and pyrrhotite.
38
2.10 Comparison to VMS deposits of the BMC
2.10.1 Tectonic setting
Detailed information regarding the tectonic setting of the Turgeon deposit is not
known, nor is its tectonic relationship to the VMS deposits of the BMC. The volcanic rocks
of the BMC represent widely separated ensialic to ensimatic portions of the Tetagouche-
Exploits back-arc basin, having formed as a result of a rifted volcanic-arc on continental
crust during the Middle Ordovician. The calc-alkalic felsic volcanic rocks of the NMH,
host to most of the VMS deposits in the BMC, are interpreted to have formed in a
continental rift and arc setting, as shown by their volcanic-arc geochemical signatures and
highly fractionated calc-alkaline FII-type rhyolite (Figure 8D and 9D; Barrie et al., 1993).
The slightly younger mafic volcanic rocks of the Fournier Group in the EBI typically
display MORB and VAB geochemical signatures (Winchester et al., 1992); as a result, the
Turgeon deposit is thought to have formed on mature back-arc basin oceanic crust.
The lithogeochemical results of this study show that Turgeon has a footwall with
tectonic affinities typical of MORB and BABB (Figure 9A, 9B and 9C), as well as a
hanging-wall consisting of weakly fractionated tholeiitic FIIIa-type rhyolite (Figure 9D).
FIII and FIV-type tholeiitic rhyolites are much less abundant in the rock record than calc-
alkalic FI and FII-type rhyolites, but commonly host VMS deposits (Lesher et al., 1986).
FIIIa-type rhyolites are interpreted to have formed at shallow crustal levels (<10 km;
Lesher et al., 1986) in a variety of rift-related tectonic environments, such as rifted island-
arcs (Barrie et al., 1993), rifted continental margins (Barrett and MacLean, 1999), and
extensional environments (Lentz, 1998). Turgeon’s lithogeochemical assemblage is
consistent with the geologic setting of the Fournier Group in the EBI and confirms that
Turgeon formed on back-arc basin oceanic crust in the ensimatic portion of the
Tetagouche-Exploits back-arc basin, whereas the VMS deposits of the BMC formed in a
continental rift and arc setting.
39
2.10.2 Source of sulfur
Archean and Proterozoic VMS deposits are characterized by δ34
S values at or near
0‰, with very limited variability (Huston, 1999). In contrast, Phanerozoic VMS deposits
are characterized by highly variable δ34
S values. Sangster (1968) showed that the δ34
S
values of sulfides in Phanerozoic VMS deposits mimics that of seawater sulfate, with
sulfide values on average 17.5‰ more depleted in δ34
S than the contemporaneous seawater
(Huston, 1999; Figure 23). The S isotope composition of Ordovician seawater ranged from
24‰ to 29‰, with an average of 26‰ (Claypool et al., 1980). The difference in
composition between the average H2S isotope composition of hydrothermal fluids from the
Turgeon deposit (6.9‰), and that of contemporaneous seawater (26‰), is 19.1‰. This
suggests that a portion of the sulfur at the Turgeon deposit may have been derived by
thermochemical seawater sulfate reduction during reaction with the host volcanic rocks. A
portion of the lower δ34
S values at Turgeon may be derived from H2S leached from the
mafic volcanic rocks in the footwall. The relatively narrow compositional range of δ34
S
values at Turgeon suggests conditions where sulphate supply is greater than the rate of
sulfate reduction (Ohmoto, 1986), such as an open oceanic basin.
40
Figure 24 : Secular variations of sulfide and sulfate δ34
S values of worldwide VMS deposits through
geological time. Modified from Huston et al. (2010).
Two groups of VMS deposits in the BMC have distinctly different δ34
S values
(Franklin et al., 1981). The two groups of δ34
S values correspond to two ore horizons. The
Caribou horizon, hosted in the California Lake Group, has an average δ34
S value for
sulfides of 5.9‰ (+3 to +11‰), whereas the slightly younger Brunswick horizon, hosted in
the Tetagouche group, has an average δ34
S value for sulfides of 14.4‰ (+10 to +20‰)
(Goodfellow and McCutcheon, 2003). The high δ34
S values recorded in the Tetagouche and
California Lake groups are interpreted to be derived from the bacterial reduction of
seawater sulfate in closed or partly closed anoxic basins, where sulfur isotopes values
progressively become heavier as the ratio of reduced sulfide to available sulfate increases
(Goodfellow and Peter, 1996). The overall lower δ34
S values for sulfides in the California
Lake Group relative to those of the Tetagouche Group are interpreted to represent the
transition between continental to oceanic crust, as well as a more important contribution of
light, igneous-derived, H2S leached from mafic volcanic rocks (Goodfellow and Peter,
1996; Van Staal et al., 1991). The 6.9‰ mean δ34
S value of the Turgeon deposit, hosted in
41
the oceanic crust of the Fournier Group, coincides with the mean δ34
S sulfide values of the
California Lake group, suggesting both formations may be temporally and spatially
associated.
The δ34
S values for the Turgeon deposit sulfides are compatible with
thermochemical seawater sulfate reduction. The lower δ34
S values of the Fournier Group
relative to those for the rest of the BMC likely reflect a change from a partly closed, anoxic
basin to an open basin as a result of the transition from continental rift to back-arc basin.
2.10.3 Sulfide mineralization
The massive sulfide deposits of the BMC average 12.74 Mt with average grades of
0.64% Cu, 4.74% Zn, and 1.78% Pb (McCutcheon and Goodfellow, 2003). The metal
compositions of the VMS deposits of the BMC contrast with that of the Turgeon deposit.
Although Zn grades are similar (4%), Cu grades are significantly higher (1.5%) while Pb
has low concentration (30.1 ± 23.8 ppm; Appendix 11) such that massive sulfides at
Turgeon plot dominantly along the Cu – Zn axis in a Cu – Zn – Pb ternary diagram (Figure
13). Precious metals are depleted at the Turgeon deposit (up to 37 ppb Au and 8.04 ppm
Ag; Appendix 4), and contrast significantly to the VMS deposits of the BMC, which
average 51 g/t Ag and 0.54 g/t Au (Goodfellow and McCutcheon, 2003; Appendix 11). In
terms of rare metals, the Turgeon deposit is slightly enriched in Se and Co, but depleted in
Cd relative to the VMS deposits of the BMC (Appendix 11).
VMS deposits in the BMC are characterized by five distinct hydrothermal sulfide
facies: bedded ores, bedded pyrite, vent complex, sulfide stockwork zones, and iron
formations (Goodfellow and McCutcheon, 2003). The Brunswick No.12 deposit is one of
the few deposits in the BMC that displays all sulfide facies in its ore zones (Goodfellow
and McCutcheon, 2003). Bedded ores consist of fine to medium grained aggregates of
inter-banded pyrite, sphalerite and galena (Goodfellow and McCutcheon, 2003). Sphalerite
42
forms wispy and discontinuous bands that have undergone recrystallization following
intense deformation. Galena occurs as veins, disseminations and inclusions, where it is
often appearing to be replacing sphalerite. Chalcopyrite and pyrrhotite are minor, and occur
as veins cross cutting other sulfides, and as disseminations and inclusions replacing
sphalerite and pyrite. The bedded pyrite facies consists of both massive and bedded
euhedral to subhedral pyrite with minor sphalerite, galena, and chalcopyrite (Goodfellow
and McCutcheon, 2003). The vent complex consists of pyrrhotite and/or pyrite breccia
cemented and replaced by a matrix of pyrrhotite, pyrite, chalcopyrite, magnetite, chlorite,
quartz, and siderite (Goodfellow and McCutcheon, 2003). Fragments are rounded to
angular, and consist of pyrrhotite, pyrite, and chloritized host rock (Goodfellow and
McCutcheon, 2003). The vent complex sulfide facies is typical of vent-proximal sulfides
associated with VMS deposits elsewhere in the world (Galley et al., 1995; Goodfellow et
al., 1999; Large, 1977, 1992; Saez et al., 1996). The stockwork zones are characterized
predominantly by veins of pyrrhotite and/or pyrite, with disseminated chalcopyrite, cutting
though chlorite and sericite altered volcanic and sedimentary rocks (Goodfellow and
McCutcheon, 2003).
Three of the five sulfide facies are represented at the Turgeon deposit. The bedded
pyrite sulfide facies present in most BMC VMS deposits bears some similarities to the
massive pyrite zone located at the top of Turgeon deposits massive sulfide lenses. The
massive pyrite zone has similar mineralogy, but is not bedded like those in the BMC. The
vent complex at Turgeon is located at the base of both massive sulfide lenses and is similar
to those of the BMC in terms of mineralogy (pyrrhotite + chalcopyrite + chlorite ± pyrite)
and texture (brecciated pyrite and chloritized host rock). Unlike the VMS deposits in the
BMC, the stockwork zones underlying both massive sulfide lenses at Turgeon are barren of
pyrrhottite, and are instead dominated by chalcopyrite veins cutting through chlorite altered
volcanic rocks. Temperatures in the stockwork zones at the time of mineralization are
interpreted to have been >300°C based on chlorite geothermometry (329 - 361°C; Figure
22) and thermodynamic modeling, which stipulates that Cu is only capable of being
transported at temperatures above 300°C (Franklin et al., 2005). The bedded ore and iron
43
formation facies commonly found in BMC VMS deposits are absent at the Turgeon
deposit.
2.10.4 Hydrothermal alteration
The hydrothermal alteration that is associated to VMS deposits of the BMC have
been documented in detail for the Brunswick No. 12 (Goodfellow, 1975; Juras, 1981; Lentz
and Goodfellow, 1993; Lentz and Goodfellow, 1996; Luff et al., 1992), Brunswick No. 6
(Nelson, 1983; Yang et al., 2003), Heath Steele (Lentz et al., 1997; Wahl, 1977), Halfmile
Lake (Adair, 1992; Yang et al., 2003), and Caribou (Goodfellow, 2003) deposits. Massive
sulfide lenses in these deposits are typically underlain by a network of sulfide stockworks
(Goodfellow and McCutcheon, 2003). The core of these stockworks most commonly
consist of quartz + Fe-rich chlorite (ripidolite) + pyrrhotite + chalcopyrite (Goodfellow and
McCutcheon, 2003). This zone is characterized by gains in Si, Fe, CO2, and metals, and
losses in Na and Ca (Goodfellow and McCutcheon, 2003). The margins of the stockwork
zone consist of Fe-Mg-chlorite (pycnochlorite) + sericite (phengite) + pyrite (Goodfellow
and McCutcheon, 2003). This zone is characterized by gains in Mg, Mn, CO2 and metals,
and losses in Na, Ca, K, Ba and Rb (Goodfellow and McCutcheon, 2003). In general,
sulfides, chlorite and sericite (phengite) increase in abundance with proximity to the
stockwork zone, whereas feldspar decreases in abundance (Goodfellow and McCutcheon,
2003).
Some of the alteration mineral assemblages that characterize the Turgeon deposit
are similar to those attributed to the VMS deposits of the BMC. The core of the stockwork
zones at Turgeon share the same mineral assemblages as those in the BMC. Chlorite in the
stockwork zones is iron-rich ripidolite, whereas the margins of the stockwork zones feature
Mg-rich pycnochlorite. This variation in chlorite composition, where Fe enrichment occurs
at the core of the hydrothermal discharge zone, is also well documented in other modern
and ancient VMS deposits (Roberts and Reardon, 1978; Hendry, 1981; Kranidioris and
MacLean, 1987; McLoeod, 1987; Slack et al., 1992). Similar to the other deposits in the
44
region, rocks in the stockwork zone at Turgeon have lost Si, Na and Ca, and gained Fe, Mg
and Mn. Despite these similarities, sericite (phengite) is not a dominant alteration mineral
at Turgeon.
2.11 Comparison to other Appalachian VMS deposits
The Appalachian orogen in Newfoundland, similar to New Brunswick, is divided
into four tectonostratigraphic zones: the Humber Zone, Dunnage Zone, Gander Zone, and
Avalon Zone (Williams et al., 1988; Figure 1). These tectonostratigraphic zones reflect
different paleogeographic settings within and marginal to the early Paleozoic Iapetus
Ocean. The Dunnage zone of New Brunswick and Newfoundland (Figure 1) represents a
series of Cambrian to Ordovician arc and back-arc basin assemblages. The Turgeon
deposit, located in the Dunnage Zone of New Brunswick, shares certain similarities to the
bimodal-felsic VMS deposits of the Buchans Camp, the bimodal-mafic VMS deposits of
Rambler Camp and Wild Bight Group, and the mafic VMS deposits of Betts Cove and Tilt
Cove Ophiolites, all of which are located in the Dunnage Zone of Newfoundland.
2.11.1 The Buchans Camp VMS deposits, Newfoundland (Canada)
The Turgeon deposit shares certain similarities with the bimodal-felsic Buchans Zn-
Pb-Cu VMS deposits in central Newfoundland, Canada. The Buchans deposits are located
in the Notre Dame Subzone of the Dunnage Zone of Newfoundland, and are hosted in the
Ordovician calc-alkaline volcanic rocks of the Buchans Group, consisting of interbedded
mafic to felsic pyroclastics, flows, and breccias, interpreted to have formed in an
Ordovician mature-arc environment (Swinden et al., 1991). From 1928-1978, 17.4 Mt of
ore grading 14.62% Zn, 7.6% Pb, and 1.34% Cu have been mined at the camp (Thurlow
and Swanson, 1981).
45
Turgeon and Buchans are characterized by similar sulfide δ34
S values (+2.9 to
+8.7‰; Kowalik et al., 1981) that indicate that the sulfur in both deposits was principally
derived from thermochemical sulfate reduction of Ordovician seawater in an open oceanic
basin during reaction with the host volcanic rocks. The Buchans deposit is also
characterized by volcanic breccias consisting of poorly sorted rounded to angular rhyolite,
andesite, and sulfide fragments cemented by pyrite, barite, galena, and sphalerite (Walker
and Barbour, 1981). The volcanic breccias at Buchans are interpreted to represent sediment
gravity flows that have been deposited in paleo-topographic depressions on the Ordovician
seafloor (Walker and Barbour, 1981). The Turgeon deposits breccia zone is texturally
similar to the breccias of the Buchans deposit, which may indicate that both units formed
by similar processes.
Although Buchans and Turgeon may have formed in a similar environment, as
shown by their similar sulfur isotope compositions, both deposits feature different
hydrothermal alterations, such as illite-montmorillonite alteration at Buchans, and types of
sulfide mineralization, such as the high Zn and Pb grades, pyrite-poor massive sulfide
lenses, and thinly-bedded bands of sphalerite and galena present at Buchans (Thurlow and
Swanson, 1981). The Buchans massive sulfide lenses are also characterized by barite,
which is absent at Turgeon (Thurlow and Swanson, 1981).
2.11.2 The VMS deposits of the Rambler Camp and Wild Bight Group, Newfoundland
(Canada)
The VMS deposits of the Rambler Camp and Wild Bight Group are located in the
Notre Dame Bay area of the Dunnage Zone in Newfoundland (Canada; Figure 1). The
VMS deposits of the Rambler Camp are hosted in the dominantly mafic volcanic rocks of
the Pacquet Habrour Group in the Notre Dame Subzone, where massive sulfide lenses are
associated with small accumulations felsic pyroclastic rocks. Although Turgeon and
Rambler may be share lithological similarities, the VMS deposits of the Rambler Camp
have island-arc affinities, and contrast to the dominantly MORB affinity of the Turgeon
46
deposit (Swinden and Thorpe, 1984). The Rambler Camp contains over 20.7 Mt of ore
grading 1.49% Cu, 0.08% Zn, 0.35 g/t Au, and 2.51 g/t Ag (Rambler Metals and Mining
PLC, Press Release, Sept. 8, 2006). Although Cu grades are similar to Turgeon, Zn grades
are significantly lower while Au and Ag grades are higher. Turgeon and Rambler feature
similar sulfide assemblages (massive pyrite + chalcopyrite + pyrrhotite ± sphalerite),
however Rambler contains more pyrrhotite in its massive sulfide lenses and stockwork
zones (Swinden and Thorpe, 1984).
Similar to the Rambler deposits, the VMS deposits of the Wild Bight Group are
contained within dominantly mafic volcanic rocks of island-arc affinities. Similar to
Turgeon, massive sulfide lenses consist principally of massive pyrite and chalcopyrite with
lesser sphalerite, and are associated with small rhyolite domes. The largest deposit within
the Wild Bight Group contains 15 Mt of ore grading 0.56% Cu and 2% Zn (Noranda Mines
Limited, 1974), and features bedded sulfides that are overlain by volcanogenic sediments
(Swinden and Thorpe, 1984). This contrasts to Turgeon’s massive mineralization and
higher Cu and Zn grades, as well as to its lack of sediment in its footwall and hanging-wall
stratigraphy.
2.11.3 The Betts Cove and Tilt Cove VMS deposits, Newfoundland (Canada)
The Betts Cove and Tilt Cove VMS deposits are located in the Lower Ordovician
ophiolitic rocks of island-arc tholeiite affinity within the Dunnage Zone in north-central
Newfoundland, Canada (Figure 1; Swinden et al., 1991). The Betts Cove deposit, having
produced 130,000 tons of ore grading 10% Cu in the late 1800’s (Snelgrove and Baird,
1953), is hosted in the Betts Cove ophiolite, which consists of ultramafic rocks overlain by
gabbro, sheeted dykes, and pillow lavas (Strong and Saunders, 1988). Aside from the
presence of rhyolite in its hanging-wall, the Turgeon deposit features a similar lithologic
association. The Betts Cove and Tilt Cove VMS deposits have similar hydrothermal
alteration and types of sulfide mineralization. All three deposits are characterized by a
stockwork zone consisting of chlorite + quartz + pyrite, with the adjacent footwall basalts
47
characterized by a greenschist facies assemblage consisting of epidote + chlorite + albite +
quartz ± calcite (Strong and Saunders, 1988). The most altered rocks at Tilt Cove show
losses in Si, Ca, and Na, and gains in Fe and Mg (Strong and Saunders, 1988).
Similarly to Turgeon, mineralization at Betts Cove and Tilt Cove is characterized by
massive pyrite and chalcopyrite, with lesser amounts of sphalerite (Strong and Saunders,
1988). Pyrite is euhedral and brecciated, and is commonly cemented by chalcopyrite and
sphalerite (Upadhyay and Strong, 1973). Sulfide δ34
S values at Tilt Cove indicate that the
majority of the sulfur was derived from the thermochemical reduction of Ordovician
seawater sulfate (Bachinski, 1977). In contrast to the Turgeon deposit, the Tilt Cove and
Betts Cove VMS deposits have higher copper (2 – 12%), gold (up to 10 ppm) and silver
grades (up to 39 ppm), where gold is found in stringer and banded sulfides and is associated
with sphalerite (up to 2.9 ppm; Strong and Saunders, 1988). Tilt Cove and Betts Cove also
feature banded massive sulfides that show sedimentary laminations (Upadhyay and Strong,
1973), whereas Turgeon does not.
2.12 Conclusion The Turgeon VMS deposit contrasts significantly to the VMS deposits of the BMC
with regards to types of mineralization, hydrothermal alteration, sulfur isotope
compositions, and tectonic settings. The Turgeon deposit formed in an open oceanic back-
arc basin, where sulfides were primarily derived from thermochemical reduction of
seawater sulfate, whereas the VMS deposits of the BMC formed during the initial stages of
continental rifting in partially closed anoxic basins. Turgeon is similar to the Buchans VMS
deposit with regards to the source of sulfur in sulfides, but differs with regards to types of
mineralization, hydrothermal alteration, and lithological assemblage. Turgeon shares many
similarities, such as lithological assemblages, base metal grades, and types of
mineralization, to the bimodal-mafic VMS deposits of the Rambler Camp and Wild Bight
Group. The Turgeon deposit is most similar, however, to the Betts Cove and Tilt Cove
mafic-type VMS deposits of Newfoundland, as it shares similar lithological assemblages,
48
hydrothermal alteration, types of mineralization, and sulfur isotopic signatures to Betts
Cove and Tilt Cove, but lacks the gold and silver enrichment.
49
Chapter 3: General conclusion
Lithogeochemical results show that the footwall rocks of the Turgeon deposit
consist of tholeiitic basalt and andesite with MORB, back-arc basin basalt, and volcanic-arc
basalt tectonic affinities. Overlying the sheeted dykes and pillow basalts is a FIIIa type
rhyolite unit. This type of rhyolite is commonly associated to VMS deposits, and forms in
shallow crustal settings in rift-related tectonic environments. The geochemical results are
consistent with the regional geologic setting that suggests that the Turgeon deposit formed
in the ensimatic portion of the Tetagouche-Exploits back-arc basin, whereas the VMS
deposits of the BMC formed in a continental rift and arc setting.
The δ34
S values for the Turgeon deposit sulfides are compatible with
thermochemical Ordovician seawater sulfate reduction. The lower δ34
S values of the
Fournier Group relative to those for the rest of the BMC likely reflect a change from a
partly closed, anoxic basin to an open basin as a result of the transition from continental rift
to back-arc basin.
Hydrothermal alteration and types of sulfide mineralization at Turgeon are not
compatible with those of the VMS deposit of the BMC. The hydrothermal alteration at the
Turgeon deposit is characterized by chlorite-pyrite, whereas the VMS deposits of the BMC
are characterized chlorite-sericite. Turgeon is rich in Cu and Zn, with little to no Pb, Au and
Ag, whereas the VMS deposits of the BMC are rich in Zn and Pb while being rich in Au,
Ag, and Cd relative to Turgeon. Turgeon is characterized by massive pyrite cemented by
chalcopyrite-sphalerite, whereas most of the VMS deposits of the BMC are characterized
by bedded sphalerite-galena-pyrite, with only minor chalcopyrite.
The δ34
S sulfide values for the Turgeon deposit and Buchans deposit in
Newfoundland (Canada) are compatible with thermochemical Ordovician seawater sulfate
50
reduction. Turgeon and Buchans contrast in terms of hydrothermal alteration and types of
mineralization. The Turgeon deposit shares similar types of mineralization to the deposits
of the Rambler Camp and Wight Bight Group. The Turgeon deposit is most similar to the
Betts Cove and Tilt Cove deposits in Newfoundland, Canada. Turgeon shares similar
lithological assemblages, hydrothermal alteration, types of mineralization, and sulfur
isotopic signatures to Betts Cove and Tilt Cove, but lacks the gold and silver enrichments
present in Newfoundland bimodal-mafic and mafic-type VMS deposits.
51
Bibliography
Adair, R.N., (1992), Stratigraphy, structure, and geochemistry of the Halfmile Lake massive-sulfide
deposit, New Brunswick, Exploration and Mining Geology, vol. 1, p. 151-166.
Bachinski, D.J., (1977), Sulfur isotopic composition of ophiolitic cupriferous iron sulfide deposits,
Notre Dame Bay, Newfoundland, Economic Geology, vol. 72, p. 243-257.
Barrett, T.J., and MacLean, W.H., (1999), Volcanic sequences, lithogeochemistry, and
hydrothermal alteration in some bimodal volcanic-associated massive sulfide systems, Reviews in
Economic Geology, vol. 8, p. 101–113.
Barrie, C.T., Ludden, J.N., and Green, A.H., (1993), Geochemistry of volcanic rocks associated
with Cu-Zn and Ni-Cu deposits in the Abitibi subprovince, Economic Geology, vol. 88, p. 1341–
1358.
Cabanis, B., and Lecolle, M., (1989), Le diagramme La/10-Y/15-Nb/8: un outil pour la
discrimination des séries volcaniques et la mise en évidence des processus de mélange et/ou de
contamination crustale. C.R. Acad. Sci. Ser. II, p. 2023-2029.
Cathelineau,, M. (1988), Cation site occupancy in chlorites and illites as a function of temperature,
Clay Minerals, vol. 23, p. 471-485
Claypool, G.E., Holser, W.T., Kaplan, I.R., Sakai, H., and Zak, I., (1980), The age curves of sulfur
and oxygen isotopes in marine sulfate and their mutual interpretation, Chemical Geology, vol. 28, p.
199-260
Deakin, M.K., (2011), Metallogeny of the Nicholas-Denys Pb-Zn-Ag deposit, Canada, Unpublished
M.Sc. thesis, Université Laval, 94 p.
Franklin, J.M., Gibson, H. L., Jonasson, I. R., and Galley, A. G., (2005), Volcanogenic massive
sulfide deposits, Economic Geology 100th Anniversary Volume, p. 523-560.
Franklin, J.M., Lydon, J.W., and Sangster, D.F., (1981), Volcanic-associated massive sulfide
deposits, Economic Geology 75th Anniversary Volume, p. 485–627.
Fyffe, L.R., (1995), Regional geology and lithogeochemistry in the vicinity of the Chester VMS
deposit, Big Bald mountain area, New Brunswick, Canada: Exploration and Mining Geology, vol.
4, p. 153-173.
Galley, A.G., Watkinson, D.H., Jonasson, I.R., and Riverin, G., (1995), The subsea-floor formation
of volcanic-hosted massive sulfide; evidence from the Ansil Deposit, Rouyn-Noranda, Canada,
Economic Geology, vol. 90, p. 2006-2017.
Goodfellow, W.D., (2003), Geology and genesis of the Caribou deposit, Bathurst Mining Camp,
northern New Brunswick, in Goodfellow, W.D., McCutcheon, S.R., and Peter, J.M., eds., Massive
Sulfide Deposits of the Bathurst Mining Camp, New Brunswick, and Northern Maine, Economic
Geology Monograph 11, p. 327-360.
52
Goodfellow, W.D., and McCutcheon, S.R., (2003), Geological and genetic attributes of volcanic-
associated massive sulfide deposits of the Bathurst Mining Camp, northern New Brunswick – a
synthesis, Economic Geology Monograph 11, p. 245-301.
Goodfellow, W.D., (1975), Major and minor element halos in volcanic rocks at Brunswick no. 12
sulphide deposit, N.B., Canada, in Elliot, I. L., and Fletcher, W. K., eds., Geochemical Exploration
1974, Amsterdam, Elsevier, p. 279-295.
Goodfellow, W.D., and Peter, J.M., (1996), Sulphur isotope composition of the Brunswick No 12
massive sulphide deposit, Bathurst Mining Camp, New Brunswick: Implications for ambient
environment, sulphur source, and ore genesis, Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, vol. 33(2), p.
231-251.
Goodfellow, W.D., Zierenberg, R.A., and Party, O.L., (1999), Genesis of massive sulphide deposits
at sediment-covered spreading centers, in Barrie, C.T., and Hannington, M.D., eds., Volcanic-
associated Massive Sulfide Deposits: Processes and Examples in Modern and Ancient Settings,
Reviews in Economic Geology, Society of Economic Geologists, vol. 8, p. 297-324.
Grant, J.A., (1986), The isocon diagram: a simple solution to Gresens' equation for metasomatic
alteration, Economic Geology, vol. 81, p. 1976-1982.
Hart, T.R., Gibson, H.L., Lesher, C.M., (2004), Trace element geochemistry and petrogenesis of
felsic volcanic rocks associated with volcanogenic massive Cu-Zn-Pb sulfide deposits, Economic
Geology, vol. 99, p. 1003-1013.
Hendry, D.A.F., (1981), Chlorites, phengites, and siderites from the Prince Lyelle ore deposits,
Tasmania, and the origin of the deposit, Economic Geology, vol. 76, p. 285-303.
Hey, M.H., (1954), A new review of chlorites, Mineral Magazine, vol. 30, p. 277–292.
Hibbard, J., van Staal., C., Rankin, D., Williams, H., (2006), Lithotectonic map of the Appalachian
Orogen, Canada-United States of America, Geological Survey of Canada, Map 2096A.
Huston, D.L., (1999), Stable isotopes and their significance for understanding the genesis of
volcanic-hosted massive sulfide deposits, A review, Reviews in Economic Geology, vol. 10, p.
151−180.
Huston, D.L., Pehrsson, S., Eglington, B.M., Zaw, K., (2010), The geology and metallogeny of
volcanic-hosted massive sulfide deposits: Variations through geologic time and with tectonic
setting, Economic Geology, vol. 105, p. 571-591
Hutchinson, R.W., (1981), A synthesis and overview of Buchans geology, in The Buchans ore
bodies: fifty year of geology and mining, Geological association of Canada Special Paper 22, p.
325-350.
Juras, S.J. (1981), Alteration and sulfide mineralization in footwall felsic and metasedimentary
rocks, Brunswick No. 12 deposit, Bathurst, New Brunswick, Canada: Unpubl. M.Sc. thesis,
University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, 208 p.
Kajiwara, Y., and Krouse, H.R., (1971), Sulfur isotope partitioning in metallic sulfide systems,
Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, vol. 8, p.1397-1408.
53
Kettles, K.R., (1987), The Turgeon mafic volcanic associated Fe-Cu-Zn sulphide deposit in the
ophiolitic Fournier Group, Northern New Brunswick, Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of New
Brunswick, 202 p.
Kowalik, J., Rye, R.O., and Sawkins, F.J., (1981), Stable isotope study of the Buchans,
Newfoundland, polymetallic sulphide deposits, in The Buchans ore bodies: fifty years of geology
and mining, Geological association of Canada special paper 22, p. 229-254.
Kranidioris, P., and MacLean, W.H., (1987), Systematics of chlorite alteration at the Phelps Dodge
massive sulfide deposits, Matagami, Quebec, Economic Geology, vol. 82, p. 1898-1911.
Large, R.R., (1992), Australian volcanic-hosted massive sulfide deposits: features, styles and
genetic models, Economic Geology, vol. 87, p. 471-510.
Large, R.R., (1977), Chemical evolution and zonation of massive sulfide deposits in volcanic
terrains: Economic Geology, vol. 72, p. 549-572.
Large, R.R., Gemmell, G.B., and Paulick, H. (2001), The alteration box plot: a simple approach to
understanding the relationship between alteration mineralogy and lithogeochemistry associated with
volcanic-hosted massive sulfide deposits, Economic Geology, vol. 96, p. 957-971.
Lentz, D.R., (1999), Petrology, geochemistry, and oxygen isotope interpretation of felsic volcanic
and related rocks hosting the Brunswick 6 and 12 massive sulfide deposits (Brunswick Belt),
Bathurst Mining Camp, New Brunswick, Canada, Economic Geology, vol. 94, p. 57-86.
Lentz, D.R., (1998), Petrogenetic evolution of felsic volcanic sequences associated with
Phanerozoic volcanic-hosted massive sulfide systems: The role of extensional geodynamics, Ore
Geology Reviews, v. 12, p. 289–327.
Lentz, D.R., and Goodfellow, W.D., (1996), Intense silicification of footwall sedimentary rocks in
the stockwork alteration beneath the Brunswick No. 12 massive sulphide deposit, Bathurst, New
Brunswick, Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, vol. 33, p. 284-302.
Lentz, D.R., and Goodfellow, W.D., (1993), Petrology and mass balance constraints on the origin of
quartz augen schist associated with the Brunswick massive sulphide deposits, Bathurst, New
Brunswick, Canadian Mineralogist, vol. 31, p. 877-903.
Lentz, D.R., Hall, D.C., and Hoy, L.D., (1997), Chemostratigraphic, alteration, and oxygen isotopic
trends in a profile through the stratigraphic sequence hosting the Heath Steele B Zone massive
sulphide deposit, New Brunswick, Canadian Mineralogist, vol. 35, p. 841-874.
Lesher, C.M., Goodwin, A.M., Campbell, I.H., and Gorton, M.P., (1986), Trace-element
geochemistry of ore-associated and barren, felsic metavolcanic rocks in the Superior province,
Canada: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, vol. 23, p. 222–237.
Luff, W. M., Goodfellow, W.D., and Juras, S. J., (1992), Evidence for a feeder pipe and associated
alteration at Brunswick No. 12 massive-sulfide deposit, Exploration and Mining Geology, vol. 1, p.
167-185.
54
MacLean, W.H., and Barrett, T.J., (1993), Lithogeochemical techniques using immobile elements,
Journal of Geochemical Exploration, vol. 48, p. 109-133.
McDonough, W.F., and Sun, S.S., (1995), The composition of the Earth: Chemical evolution of the
mantle, Chemical Geology, vol. 120, p. 223–253.
McLeod, R.L., (1987), Alteration associated with volcanogenic sulphide ores at Mount Chalmers,
Queensland, Australia, Transactions of the Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, vol. 96, p. B117 -
B127.
Meschede, M., (1986), A method of discriminating between different types of mid-ocean ridge
basalts and continental tholeiites with the Nb–Zr–Y diagram, Chemical Geology, vol. 56, p. 207–
218.
Nakamura, N., (1974), Determination of REE, Ba, Fe, Mg, Na, and K in carbonaceous and ordinary
chondrites, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, vol. 38, p. 757–775.
Nelson, G.A., (1983), Alteration of footwall rocks at Brunswick No. 6 and Austin Brook deposits,
Bathurst, New Brunswick, Canada, Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of New Brunswick,
Fredericton, 236 p.
Noranda Mines Ltd., (1974), The Point Leamington sulphide deposit, in Strong D.F., ed., Plate
tectonic setting of Newfoundland mineral occurrences; NATO Advanced Studies Institute, St.
John's Newfoundland, p. 60-61.
Ohmoto, H., (1986), Stable Isotope Geochemistry of Ore-Deposits, Reviews in Mineralogy and
Geochemistry, vol. 16, p. 491-559.
Pearce, J.A,, and Norry, M. J., (1979), Petrogenetic implications of Ti, Zr, Y and Nb variations in
volcanic rocks, Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, vol. 69, p. 33-47.
Roberts, R.G., and Reardon, E.J., (1978), Alteration and ore forming processes at Matagami Lake,
Quebec, Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, vol. 15, p. 1-21.
Rogers, N., van Staal, C.R., Winchester, J. A., and Fyffe, L. R., (2003), Provenance and chemical
stratigraphy of the sedimentary rocks of the Miramichi, Tetagouche, California Lake, and Fournier
Groups, Northern New Brunswick, Economic Geology Monograph 11, p. 111-128.
Ross, P-S., and Bédard, J.H., (2009) Magmatic affinity of modern and ancient subalkaline volcanic
rocks determined from trace-element discriminant diagrams, Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences,
vol. 46, p. 823-839.
Sáez, R., Almodovar, G.R., and Pascual, E., (1996), Geological constraints on massive sulphide
genesis in the Iberian pyrite belt, Ore Geology Reviews, vol. 11, p. 429-451.
Sangster, D.R, (1968), Relative sulphur isotope abundances of ancient seas and strata-bound
sulphide deposits, Proceedings of the Geologists Association Canada., vol. 19, p. 79-91.
Slack, J.F., Jiang, W.-T., Peacor, D.R., and Okita, P.M., (1992), Hydrothermal and metamorphic
bertierine from the Kidd Creek volcanogenic massive sulfide deposit, Timmins, Ontario, Canadian
Mineralogist, vol. 30, p. 1127 – 1142.
55
Strong, D.F., and Saunders, C.M., (1988), Ophiolitic sulfide mineralization at Tilt Cove,
Newfoundland: Controls by upper mantle and crustal processes, Economic Geology, vol. 83, p.
239-255.
Swinden, H.S., Evans, D.T.W., and Kean, B.F., (1991), Metallogenic framework of base and
precious metal deposits, central and western Newfoundland, Geological Survey of Canada, Open
File 2156, p. 232.
Thompson, R.N., (1982), Magmatism of the British Tertiary province, Scottish Journal of Geology,
vol. 18, p. 49-107.
Thurlow, J.G., (1993), 1992 Geological and diamond drilling report on the Turgeon prospect,
Belledune project, northern New Brunswick, Phelps Dodge Corporation of Canada Ltd.
Thurlow, J.G., and Swanson, E.A., (1981), Geology and ore deposits of the Buchans area, central
Newfoundland, in The Buchans ore bodies: fifty years of geology and mining, Geological
Association of Canada Special Paper 22, p. 113-142.
Upadhyay, H.D., and Strong, D.F., (1973), Geological setting of the Betts Cove copper deposits,
Newfoundland: An example of ophiolite sulfide mineralization, Economic Geology, vol. 68, p. 161-
167.
van Staal, C. R., Wilson, R. A., Rogers, N., Fyffe, L. R., Langton, J. P., McCutcheon, S. R.,
McNicoll, V., and Ravenhurst, C. E., (2003), Geology and tectonic history of the Bathurst
supergroup, Bathurst Mining Camp, and its relationships to coeval rocks in southwestern New
Brunswick and adjacent Maine - a synthesis, Economic Geology, Monograph 11, p. 37-60.
van Staal, C.R., Ravenhurst, C. E., Winchester, J.A. et al. (1990), Evidence for a post-Taconic
blueschist suture in northern New Brunswick, Geology, vol. 18, p. 1073- 1077.
van Staal, C.R., and Fyffe, L.R., (1991), Dunnage and Gander Zones, New Brunswick: Canadian
Appalachian region, New Brunswick Department of Natural Resources and Energy, Mineral
Resources Branch, Geoscience Report 9, p. 1-2.
van Staal, C.R., Winchester, J.A., and Bédard, J.H., (1991), Geochemical variations in Middle
Ordovician volcanic rocks of the northern Miramichi Highlands and their tectonic significance,
Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, vol. 28, p. 1031 - 1049.
Wahl, J.L., (1977), Rock geochemical exploration at the Heath Steele and Key Anacon deposits,
New Brunswick, Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of New Brunswick, 429 p.
Walker, P.N., and Barbour, D.M., (1981), Geology of the Buchans ore horizon breccias, in The
Buchans ore bodies: fifty years of geology and mining, Geological Association of Canada Special
Paper 22, p. 161-185.
Winchester, J.A., and Floyd, P.A., (1977), Geochemical discrimination of different magma series
and their differentiation products using immobile elements, Chemical Geology, vol. 20, p. 325–343.
56
Winchester, J.A., C.R., Van Staal,., and Langton, J.P., (1992), The Ordovician volcanics of the
Elmtree-Belledune inlier and their relationship to volcanics of the northern Miramichi Highlands,
New Brunswick, Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, vol. 29, p. 1430-1447.
Yang, K., Scott, S. D., and Goodfellow, W.D. (2003), Footwall alteration associated with massive
sulfide deposits in the Bathurst Mining Camp, New Brunswick: implication for seafloor
hydrothermal mixing processes, in Goodfellow, W.D., McCutcheon, S.R., and Peter, J.M., eds.,
Massive Sulfide Deposits of the Bathurst Mining Camp, New Brunswick, and Northern Maine,
Economic Geology, Monograph 11, p. 457-478.
Zagorevski, A., van Staal, C.R., V.J., McNicoll, L., Hartree, N., Rogers, (2012), Tectonic evolution
of the Dunnage Mélange tract and its significance to the closure of Iapetus, Tectonophysics, vol.
568-569, p. 371-387.
57
Appendix 1 Andesite geochemistry, Turgeon deposit.
Sample # J34432
5
EL-
22
J34480
6
J34481
4
EL-
52
EL-
53
EL-
54
J34480
7
EL-
50
EL-
51
J34434
7
SiO2
(wt%) 68.44 58.35 57.97 56.8 60.5 59.58 56.54 59.59 70.14 61.42 45.16
Al2O3 11.07 13.84 13.13 12.66 13.3 13.1 15.49 13.65 12.43 12.54 14.15
Fe2O3(T) 8.4 9.88 14.64 13.87 10.29 9.85 12.17 10.54 6.97 8.82 23.13
MnO 0.453 0.473 0.261 0.679 0.183 0.164 0.128 0.364 0.239 0.363 0.351
MgO 3.25 4.98 4.14 4.86 3.82 6.62 2.85 4.68 2.68 4.79 8.43
CaO 1.27 1.84 1.38 1.61 1.85 0.76 2.77 1.41 0.5 2.34 0.89
Na2O 3.18 4.23 3.02 2.43 4.63 3.16 5.71 4.12 3.86 3.73 0.04
K2O 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.09 0.02 0.01
TiO2 0.807 1.467 1.314 1.538 1.292 1.305 1.41 1.287 0.548 1.237 1.457
P2O5 0.26 0.38 0.33 0.22 0.43 0.28 0.29 0.31 0.15 0.3 0.41
LOI 3.37 3.89 3.97 4.52 3.01 4.79 2.75 4.41 2.5 4.52 6.51
Total 100.5 99.36 100.2 99.21 99.34 99.65 100.1 100.4 100.1 100.1 100.5
Sc (ppm) 15 25 22 30 20 23 27 23 14 21 22
Be < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
V 33 171 133 301 62 154 251 144 15 137 98
Cr < 20 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 20 < 20
Co 11 17 22 22 12 15 14 19 4 15 41
Ni < 20 < 20 < 20 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20
Cu 190 70 < 10 300 < 10 < 10 < 10 40 < 10 20 40
Zn 1630 380 80 4540 170 150 90 140 120 400 140
Ga 13 18 15 16 18 18 22 17 14 16 21
Ge 1 1.1 0.9 1 1.1 1 2.5 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
As < 5 9 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 54 11
Rb < 1 < 1 1 < 1 < 1 1 < 1 < 1 2 < 1 < 1
Sr 42 45 33 31 57 23 126 25 52 33 10
Y 47.3 49.2 48.1 48.1 68.2 71.6 45.5 48.2 55.4 43.7 50.6
Zr 137 146 153 174 220 223 178 159 194 129 212
Nb 2.2 3.3 5.9 4.9 6.3 5.5 5.2 4.9 5.8 4.2 8.1
Mo < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 3
Ag < 0.5 < 0.5 0.8 1 1.5 1.4 0.9 0.6 1.1 1.2 1.5
In 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1
Sn 1 < 1 2 4 2 2 2 < 1 2 1 1
Sb < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 0.7
Cs 0.1 0.1 1.3 0.4 0.1 1.3 0.2 0.8 0.1 0.4 1.7
Ba 33 30 20 23 26 34 17 13 41 20 8
La 13.6 9.53 10.1 10.1 13.1 14.4 12.7 11 16.5 11.1 10.4
Ce 30.8 25.7 27.2 26.2 35.3 41.4 32.5 25.9 38.8 26.2 29.4
Pr 4.14 3.79 4.08 3.82 5.37 6.14 4.61 3.95 5.4 3.89 4.95
Nd 20 19 20.9 19.4 27.5 30.9 22.3 19.1 25.5 18.7 24.7
Sm 6.09 6.14 6.45 5.79 8.81 9.29 6.16 5.82 7.09 5.23 6.94
Eu 1.54 1.83 1.67 1.49 2.41 2.65 2.02 2.27 1.64 2.08 0.731
Gd 6.72 7.14 7.73 7.32 10.9 11.4 7.65 7.65 8.47 6.8 7.91
Tb 1.15 1.28 1.4 1.35 2.03 2.08 1.36 1.39 1.54 1.19 1.46
Dy 7.86 8.63 8.78 8.61 12.8 13 8.47 8.88 9.63 7.61 9.44
Ho 1.7 1.8 1.84 1.78 2.65 2.76 1.74 1.8 2.02 1.57 2.11
Er 4.91 5.13 5.36 5.31 7.9 8.08 5.18 5.23 5.94 4.63 6.48
Tm 0.72 0.77 0.8 0.8 1.17 1.2 0.77 0.782 0.894 0.682 1.03
Yb 4.75 5.17 5.23 5.34 7.64 7.95 5.03 5.22 5.95 4.42 6.82
58
Lu 0.754 0.777 0.826 0.845 1.22 1.27 0.801 0.83 0.96 0.692 1.06
Hf 3.3 3.4 4.2 4.4 5.9 6 4.5 4.2 5.1 3.4 5.5
Ta 0.12 0.19 0.37 0.25 0.4 0.36 0.29 0.36 0.34 0.27 0.55
W 0.6 < 0.5 0.8 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 3.4 0.5 < 0.5
Tl < 0.05 <
0.05 0.09 < 0.05
<
0.05 0.05
<
0.05 < 0.05
<
0.05
<
0.05 0.09
Pb 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5
Bi < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 0.2
Th 1.66 1.4 1.33 1.51 1.39 1.62 1.83 1.58 2.11 1.18 2.61
U 0.31 0.38 0.33 0.35 0.37 0.41 0.3 0.35 0.5 0.29 1.05
59
Appendix 2 Basalt geochemistry, Turgeon deposit.
Sample # J344249 J344817 J344338 J344820 J344315 J344810
SiO2 (wt%) 54.89 51.93 48.19 53.42 59.26 50.44
Al2O3 14.16 16.45 15.49 14.27 12.14 14.21
Fe2O3 11.15 12.78 11.46 7.65 9.78 15.03
MnO 0.252 0.166 0.139 0.19 0.247 0.599
MgO 6.53 5.5 4.47 6.36 7.19 8.25
CaO 1.73 2.52 8.97 7.87 0.37 1.37
Na2O 3.97 6.47 4.09 5.34 1.68 2.19
K2O 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.49 0.02
TiO2 1.548 1.442 1.622 1.267 1.389 1.576
P2O5 0.27 0.16 0.2 0.18 0.19 0.17
LOI 4.5 3.26 4.02 3.25 6.53 5.58
Total 99.02 100.7 98.67 99.83 99.26 99.44
Sc (ppm) 26 35 40 31 28 35
Be < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
V 267 349 450 331 283 405
Cr < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20
Co 24 30 28 15 24 30
Ni < 20 30 < 20 30 < 20 20
Cu < 10 10 < 10 < 10 20 20
Zn 340 110 80 80 200 490
Ga 19 17 19 14 14 17
Ge 1.2 1.2 5.2 2.3 < 0.5 1.2
As < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 6 < 5
Rb < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 24 < 1
Sr 51 64 368 170 26 13
Y 41.8 24.9 33.9 26.7 31.3 27.7
Zr 115 77 86 90 96 89
Nb 3.7 2.9 2.4 2.5 2.4 4
Mo < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2
Ag < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
In < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1
Sn < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 4
Sb < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2
Cs 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.2 3.4 1.3
Ba 28 24 13 14 53 10
La 10.3 5.04 6.89 6.28 7 6.36
Ce 26.5 13 17.2 16.9 17.3 15.1
Pr 3.7 1.87 2.48 2.57 2.47 2.26
Nd 18 9.74 12.1 13 11.9 11.1
60
Sm 5.67 2.88 3.89 3.6 3.6 3.55
Eu 1.86 0.857 1.27 1.05 0.652 0.798
Gd 6.03 3.97 4.47 4.33 4.09 4.24
Tb 1.1 0.74 0.84 0.78 0.73 0.8
Dy 7.18 4.7 5.7 4.89 5.21 5.15
Ho 1.5 0.97 1.18 1.03 1.14 1.1
Er 4.15 2.93 3.4 3.09 3.34 3.34
Tm 0.631 0.441 0.515 0.465 0.524 0.504
Yb 4.09 2.89 3.44 3.06 3.58 3.34
Lu 0.635 0.45 0.535 0.482 0.547 0.527
Hf 2.8 2.2 2.1 2.3 2.3 2.5
Ta 0.17 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.25
W 2.2 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 1.2 < 0.5
Tl < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.1 0.57 0.06
Pb < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 13 < 5
Bi < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1
Th 1.57 0.73 0.9 1.05 1.11 0.94
U 0.28 0.15 0.29 0.14 0.26 0.22
Sample # J344318 J344804 J344813 J344808 J344821 J344812 J344216
SiO2 (wt%) 50.93 39.18 38.79 56.4 50.47 53.77 54.08
Al2O3 12.87 15.16 14.57 12.27 15.15 11.96 12.87
Fe2O3 19.08 28.88 24.3 17.09 12.65 16.32 17.43
MnO 0.576 0.791 0.635 0.522 0.632 0.517 0.714
MgO 6.92 7.21 10.38 7 9.24 9.01 6.3
CaO 1.3 0.88 1.25 0.44 0.43 0.43 1.48
Na2O 0.35 0.05 0.05 0.06 3.35 0.06 1.11
K2O 0.03 0 0.01 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.02
TiO2 1.872 1.935 2.247 1.269 1.706 1.371 1.61
P2O5 0.22 0.26 0.25 0.23 0.2 0.25 0.18
LOI 5.35 6.65 7.75 5.4 7.08 6.04 5.13
Total 99.51 101 100.2 100.7 101 99.77 100.9
Sc (ppm) 35 40 41 20 36 23 33
Be < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
V 435 511 513 163 409 235 362
Cr < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20
Co 36 37 39 20 28 24 26
Ni < 20 20 20 < 20 < 20 < 20 < 20
Cu < 10 1600 110 10 30 10 30
Zn 190 190 310 350 220 320 410
Ga 19 24 21 15 18 15 16
Ge 1.2 1.1 1 0.9 0.7 0.7 1.2
As < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5
61
Rb 1 < 1 < 1 2 2 < 1 < 1
Sr 8 8 9 8 31 8 10
Y 43.7 30.6 35.1 31.9 30.6 26.4 38.1
Zr 108 134 141 117 106 114 100
Nb 2.1 5.8 5 4.8 3.8 4.1 2.8
Mo < 2 < 2 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2
Ag < 0.5 0.5 0.7 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
In < 0.1 0.2 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1
Sn 9 1 3 2 < 1 1 3
Sb < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2
Cs 2.6 2 2.1 1 0.8 1 0.4
Ba 6 8 5 19 26 17 12
La 6.35 11.1 8.14 9.94 7.08 6.75 8.74
Ce 18 27.3 21 23.8 16.3 17.5 21.5
Pr 2.8 3.75 3.16 3.22 2.39 2.53 2.96
Nd 14.4 17.2 15.5 14.7 12.2 12.4 14.8
Sm 5.14 4.38 4.09 3.82 3.79 3.64 4.59
Eu 1.8 0.461 0.898 0.6 1.16 0.572 1.34
Gd 6.03 5 5.05 4.62 4.71 4.21 5.34
Tb 1.14 0.86 0.91 0.82 0.85 0.74 0.95
Dy 7.57 5.46 6.05 5.28 5.41 4.72 6.26
Ho 1.57 1.13 1.32 1.14 1.13 1.01 1.31
Er 4.49 3.54 4.1 3.49 3.44 3.17 3.72
Tm 0.648 0.563 0.645 0.561 0.523 0.507 0.552
Yb 4.29 3.93 4.38 3.88 3.5 3.55 3.72
Lu 0.645 0.663 0.707 0.646 0.563 0.597 0.588
Hf 2.5 3.4 3.6 3.1 2.8 3.2 2.3
Ta 0.11 0.33 0.34 0.3 0.19 0.26 0.15
W < 0.5 2.7 6.1 1.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Tl < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05
Pb < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5
Bi < 0.1 0.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1
Th 1.05 1.41 1.55 1.27 0.89 1.36 1.03
U 0.22 0.33 0.35 0.57 0.21 0.38 0.21
62
Appendix 3 Rhyolite geochemistry, Turgeon deposit
Sample # J344241 EL-56 J344324
SiO2 (wt%) 76.46 79.24 70.92
Al2O3 10.3 11.68 11.89
Fe2O3 4.23 1.99 6.39
MnO 0.175 0.017 0.19
MgO 2.21 0.46 2.37
CaO 0.26 0.08 0.61
Na2O 4.29 5.26 4.48
K2O 0.07 0.04 0.07
TiO2 0.326 0.199 0.476
P2O5 0.03 0.02 0.1
LOI 2.12 1.25 2.68
Total 100.5 100.2 100.2
Sc (ppm) 9 7 14
Be < 1 < 1 < 1
V 49 18 43
Cr < 20 < 20 < 20
Co 5 1 3
Ni < 20 < 20 < 20
Cu 10 < 10 50
Zn 250 < 30 60
Ga 12 12 16
Ge 0.6 0.9 0.8
As < 5 6 < 5
Rb 4 2 3
Sr 37 21 29
Y 67.8 69.4 50.2
Zr 290 288 283
Nb 6.2 6.8 7
Mo < 2 < 2 < 2
Ag 0.8 1.1 0.7
In < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1
Sn < 1 < 1 < 1
Sb < 0.2 0.2 < 0.2
Cs 0.3 < 0.1 0.4
Ba 26 22 17
La 14 17.1 16.3
Ce 37.7 42.2 39.3
Pr 5.45 5.66 5.14
Nd 25.8 25.8 23.1
Sm 7.66 7.22 5.88
Eu 1.02 1.81 1.12
Gd 7.8 9.24 6.05
Tb 1.6 1.71 1.16
Dy 11.3 11.2 8.3
Ho 2.54 2.33 1.88
Er 7.78 7.03 5.81
Tm 1.23 1.06 0.991
Yb 8.59 6.96 7.12
Lu 1.33 1.12 1.17
63
Hf 6.7 7.3 6.5
Ta 0.36 0.4 0.39
W < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Tl 0.06 < 0.05 0.05
Pb 16 < 5 < 5
Bi < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1
Th 3.16 2.9 3.22
U 0.63 0.53 0.66
64
Appendix 4 Sulfide geochemistry, Turgeon deposit.
Type Stockwork (Py) Stockwork (Ccp)
Sample EL-40 EL-41 J344313 J344320 J347006 J344312 J344326
S (wt%) > 20.0 18.8 > 20.0 > 20.0 19.9 14.5 15.2
Fe 36.6 30.6 38.8 32.6 29.9 25.8 25.1
K < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 0.02 < 0.01 < 0.01
Mg 1.7 3.99 1.19 3.73 0.29 2.39 1.71
Na 0.02 < 0.01 0.02 0.02 < 0.01 0.02 < 0.01
P 0.037 0.032 0.02 0.037 0.044 0.063 0.057
Ti 0.26 0.4 0.1 0.42 0.02 0.18 0.28
Au (ppb) < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 37
Ag (ppm) 1.61 1.94 1.13 0.76 8.04 6.36 12
Cu 504 781 16200 70.1 188000 155000 148000
Cd 0.1 3.3 0.9 1.1 8.8 9.9 9
Mo 13 34 12 1 1 19 3
Pb 48.2 44.1 13.9 16.9 17.6 15.4 39.1
Ni 6.2 26.1 4.6 9.3 4.3 3.4 6.4
Zn 151 1410 177 508 3060 1400 1840
Al 2.29 4.07 0.95 2.99 0.44 3.19 2.35
As 103 47.7 14 135 106 12.2 65.8
Ba 6 40 3 1 3 3 5
Be 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4
Bi 9.5 15.9 13.4 8.3 12.3 3.7 10.9
Br < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Ca 0.05 0.02 0.33 0.34 1.2 0.09 0.11
Co 172 155 288 56.8 705 97.6 582
Cr 3 37 5 3 < 1 < 1 2
Cs 0.09 0.11 1.61 0.34 3.38 0.38 0.34
Hf 1.7 1.6 0.3 1.1 0.1 0.9 0.8
Hf 2 2 < 1 < 1 < 1 2 < 1
Ga 8.6 21.6 10.2 12.4 2.1 13.2 12.8
Ge 0.9 0.9 1.5 0.7 1.8 1.3 1.8
Hg < 1 2 < 1 < 1 4 < 1 < 1
In 0.3 1.3 6.8 0.2 29.9 23.8 53.6
Ir < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5
Li 6.2 10.6 1.3 8.3 0.7 11 8
Mn 1910 2760 1250 997 644 1990 1110
Nb 1.8 1.8 0.4 1.3 < 0.1 1 1
Rb < 0.2 < 0.2 0.6 < 0.2 2.6 < 0.2 < 0.2
Re 0.01 0.014 0.013 0.009 0.009 0.014 0.016
Sb < 0.1 1 0.9 1.6 4.4 < 0.1 1.6
Sc 9.1 22.2 3.5 17.1 1.2 7.7 10.1
Se 120 66.4 170 32 283 185 325
Sn 5 4 2 2 6 11 12
Sr 0.5 1.8 4.4 8.6 7.6 2.3 4.4
Ta < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1
Te 3.6 8.7 9.4 10.6 7.5 9 16
Th 0.9 0.9 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.4 0.3
Tl < 0.05 2.68 0.38 6.74 5.76 0.62 0.9
U 1.4 2.3 0.8 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.3
V 63 165 39 205 9 78 116
65
W < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Y 12.3 15.9 7.8 27.8 4.2 10.7 11.7
Zr 58 61 14 38 6 29 27
La 1.8 3.6 0.7 3.7 1 1.6 1.9
La 2.8 3.9 1.2 4.6 1.5 2.2 2.8
Ce 5 9.5 1.8 10.9 2.6 4.4 5.4
Ce 7 10 < 3 10 < 3 < 3 6
Pr 0.7 1.5 0.3 1.7 0.4 0.7 0.9
Nd 3.9 6.9 1.8 9 1.8 3.5 4.5
Nd < 5 < 5 < 5 10 < 5 < 5 < 5
Sm 1.2 2 0.7 2.9 0.6 1.1 1.4
Sm 1.4 1.4 0.6 3.1 0.5 1 1.3
Eu 0.48 0.8 0.13 0.41 0.1 0.15 0.26
Eu 0.6 1 0.5 0.4 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2
Gd 1.7 2.5 1 4.4 0.8 1.7 1.8
Dy 2.3 3.2 1.2 5.4 0.8 2.1 2.3
Tb 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.8 0.1 0.3 0.3
Tb < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.8 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Ho 0.5 0.7 0.3 1 0.1 0.4 0.5
Er 1.5 2 0.8 2.9 0.4 1.3 1.4
Tm 0.2 0.3 < 0.1 0.4 < 0.1 0.2 0.2
Yb 1.5 1.7 0.6 2.3 0.4 1.2 1.4
Yb 1.3 1.4 0.5 2.2 < 0.2 1 1.2
Lu 0.2 0.3 < 0.1 0.3 < 0.1 0.2 0.2
Lu 0.24 0.26 < 0.05 0.32 < 0.05 0.14 0.17
Type Massive Py Massive Py Sulfide breccia
Sample J344322 J344337 J344321 EL-27
S (wt%) > 20.0 > 20.0 18.1 > 20.0
Fe 37.4 42 43.5 34.1
K < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01
Mg 1.7 0.21 1.65 0.68
Na 0.02 0.02 0.02 < 0.01
P 0.008 0.003 0.013 0.01
Ti < 0.01 < 0.01 0.03 0.13
Au (ppb) < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2
Ag (ppm) 0.94 1.91 2.57 3.21
Cu 3200 9120 58600 8640
Cd 1.5 1.1 2.2 16.4
Mo < 1 2 8 9
Pb 34 6.4 5.4 90.6
Ni 2.5 3 3.6 6.9
Zn 659 242 477 7040
Al 0.45 0.67 0.78 0.99
As 62.8 14.5 6.1 165
Ba < 1 1 < 1 4
Be 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4
Bi 9 17.4 5.2 14.1
Br < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Ca 0.02 0.1 0.13 0.03
66
Co 27.2 162 788 212
Cr 5 < 1 < 1 2
Cs 0.1 1.11 0.65 0.05
Hf < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.3
Hf < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Ga 0.9 1.8 5.4 4.8
Ge 0.8 1 1.6 1.2
Hg 2 < 1 2 < 1
In 1.1 2.7 13.3 3.4
Ir < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5
Li < 0.5 < 0.5 1.5 3.9
Mn 127 224 496 694
Nb < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.5
Rb < 0.2 0.3 0.2 < 0.2
Re 0.008 0.008 0.011 0.011
Sb 2 < 0.1 0.6 4.1
Sc 0.2 0.4 1.9 3.8
Se 38.4 117 245 134
Sn 1 1 2 2
Sr 0.7 1.1 2.5 0.6
Ta < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1
Te 6.3 10.5 4.5 12.4
Th < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 0.2
Tl 4.63 0.83 1.26 6.28
U 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.2
V 7 9 23 33
W < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1
Y 0.4 1.9 6.9 3.1
Zr < 1 < 1 5 13
La 0.1 0.3 0.1 2.2
La 0.6 0.6 < 0.5 2.8
Ce 0.3 0.6 0.3 5.3
Ce < 3 < 3 < 3 6
Pr < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.7
Nd 0.4 0.4 0.3 3.2
Nd < 5 10 < 5 6
Sm 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.7
Sm 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.7
Eu 0.1 < 0.05 0.07 0.13
Eu < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 0.6
Gd 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.6
Dy 0.1 0.4 1.3 0.6
Tb < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1
Tb < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5
Ho < 0.1 < 0.1 0.3 0.1
Er < 0.1 0.2 0.7 0.4
Tm < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1
Yb < 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.4
Yb < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 0.7
Lu < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1
Lu < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.08
67
Appendix 5 Electron microprobe data for pyrite.
Smp Type Fe
(wt%) S (wt%)
Zn
(wt%)
Cu
(wt%)
Pb
(wt%)
Co
(wt%)
Ni
(wt%)
Ag
(wt%)
As
(wt%)
Se
(wt%)
320 py5 Massive Py
46.93 53.36 <0.05 0.07 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
320 py4 Massive
Py 46.67 53.31 0.07 0.09 0.13 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
320 py6 Massive Py
46.63 53.14 0.30 0.02 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
320 py2 Massive
Py 46.43 53.86 <0.05 0.02 0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.06
320 py1 Massive Py
46.68 53.79 <0.05 <0.05 0.14 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
320 py3 Massive
Py 46.84 53.96 <0.05 0.09 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
313 py7 Massive Py
46.79 52.95 <0.05 <0.05 0.11 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
313 py6 Massive
Py 46.87 53.27 0.09 <0.05 0.12 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
313 py5 Massive Py
46.64 53.37 <0.05 0.06 0.13 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
313 py4 Massive
Py 46.04 53.09 <0.05 0.05 <0.08 0.37 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.14
313 py1 Massive
Py 46.55 53.12 <0.05 0.13 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
313 py2 Massive
Py 46.16 53.25 <0.05 <0.05 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
313 py3 Massive
Py 46.38 53.21 0.09 0.11 0.13 0.13 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
006 py7 Stockwo
rk (Ccp) 46.88 53.26 0.08 <0.05 0.16 0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
006 py8 Stockwo
rk (Ccp) 46.30 50.88 <0.05 0.08 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.14
006 py6 Stockwo
rk (Ccp) 46.43 53.23 <0.05 <0.05 0.10 0.13 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
006 py5 Stockwo
rk (Ccp) 46.51 53.24 <0.05 <0.05 0.13 0.17 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
006 py4 Stockwo
rk (Ccp) 46.72 53.29 0.12 <0.05 0.10 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
006 py2 Stockwo
rk (Ccp) 46.52 53.23 <0.05 <0.05 0.12 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.10
006 py1 Stockwo
rk (Ccp) 46.57 53.18 0.30 <0.05 0.09 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.09
006 py3 Stockwo
rk (Ccp) 46.45 52.82 <0.05 <0.05 0.16 0.39 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.07
EL42
py4
Stockwo
rk (Py) 46.29 53.13 0.10 0.07 0.15 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
EL42
py3
Stockwo
rk (Py) 46.48 52.95 <0.05 <0.05 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
EL42 py5
Stockwork (Py)
45.98 53.17 <0.05 <0.05 0.11 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
EL27
py9
Sulfide
breccia 46.27 53.07 <0.05 0.07 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
EL27 Sulfide 46.50 53.02 0.02 <0.05 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
EL27 py11
Sulfide breccia
45.56 51.71 <0.05 0.07 0.26 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
EL27
py12
Sulfide
breccia 46.31 52.91 0.16 <0.05 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
EL27 py13
Sulfide breccia
46.29 52.98 <0.05 <0.05 <0.08 0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
EL27
py14
Sulfide
breccia 46.08 52.68 <0.05 0.07 0.14 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
EL27
py7
Sulfide
breccia 46.52 53.08 <0.05 <0.05 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
68
EL27
py6
Sulfide
breccia 46.44 53.15 <0.05 <0.05 0.10 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.06
EL27 py8
Sulfide breccia
46.44 52.59 0.12 0.07 0.15 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
327 py1 Stockwo
rk (Ccp) 45.94 52.51 <0.05 0.34 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
327 py2 Stockwork (Ccp)
46.26 52.61 <0.05 0.22 0.11 0.21 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
326 py2 Stockwo
rk (Ccp) 45.16 51.86 <0.05 0.18 0.11 0.80 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.13
326 py1 Stockwork (Ccp)
45.73 52.33 <0.05 0.02 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.13
326 py3 Stockwo
rk (Ccp) 45.64 52.43 <0.05 0.13 0.09 0.29 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
337 py10
Massive Ccp + Po
46.18 52.48 0.13 0.08 0.16 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
337 py9 Massive
Ccp + Po 46.16 52.98 0.12 <0.05 0.11 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
337 py8 Massive Ccp + Po
45.02 50.58 <0.05 0.09 0.10 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
337 py7 Massive
Ccp + Po 46.06 53.18 <0.05 0.09 0.11 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
337 py6 Massive Ccp + Po
45.82 52.80 <0.05 0.12 0.12 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
337 py5 Massive
Ccp + Po 45.89 52.50 <0.05 0.17 0.15 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
337 py1 Massive
Ccp + Po 46.22 53.36 <0.05 0.05 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.06
337 py2 Massive
Ccp + Po 46.12 52.70 <0.05 0.10 0.15 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
337 py3 Massive
Ccp + Po 46.02 53.18 <0.05 <0.05 0.18 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.16
337 py4 Massive
Ccp + Po 46.10 53.30 0.11 <0.05 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
801 py4 Sulfide
breccia 45.88 53.09 <0.05 <0.05 0.10 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
801 py5 Sulfide
breccia 46.01 53.29 <0.05 <0.05 0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
801 py3 Sulfide
breccia 46.47 53.41 0.17 0.12 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
801 py2 Sulfide
breccia 46.64 53.47 <0.05 <0.05 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
801 py1 Sulfide
breccia 46.34 53.32 <0.05 0.11 0.09 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
801 py7 Sulfide
breccia 46.78 52.78 <0.05 <0.05 0.09 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
801 py6 Sulfide
breccia 46.14 53.24 <0.05 0.14 0.09 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
322 py6 Massive
Py 45.99 53.18 <0.05 <0.05 0.11 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
322 py7 Massive
Py 45.98 53.41 <0.05 <0.05 0.13 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
322 py8 Massive
Py 46.00 53.40 0.14 <0.05 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
322 py3 Massive
Py 46.69 53.67 <0.05 0.16 0.09 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
322 py4 Massive Py
46.46 53.14 <0.05 <0.05 0.11 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
322 py5 Massive
Py 46.40 53.04 0.24 <0.05 0.10 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
322 py1 Massive Py
46.41 53.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
69
Appendix 6 Electron microprobe data for chalcopyrite.
Smp Type Fe
(wt%)
S
(wt%)
Zn
(wt%)
Cu
(wt%)
Pb
(wt%)
Co
(wt%)
Mn
(wt%)
Ni
(wt%)
Ag
(wt%)
Se
(wt%)
006 cpy1
Stockwork (Ccp)
29.88 34.48 <0.05 33.98 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
006
cpy2
Stockwork
(Ccp) 29.90 34.21 <0.05 33.82 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
327 cpy1
Stockwork (Ccp)
29.86 33.95 <0.05 33.59 0.09 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
327
cpy2
Stockwork
(Ccp) 30.15 34.22 <0.05 33.68 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
326 cpy1
Stockwork (Ccp)
29.71 33.94 0.16 33.59 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.10
326
cpy2
Stockwork
(Ccp) 29.68 34.16 0.07 34.34 0.10 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.07
321 cpy2
Massive Ccp + Po
29.74 34.38 <0.05 34.10 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
321
cpy1
Massive Ccp
+ Po 29.72 34.43 <0.05 33.70 0.10 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
70
Appendix 7 Electron microprobe data for pyrrhotite
Smp Type Fe
(wt%)
S
(wt%)
Zn
(wt%)
Cu
(wt%)
Pb
(wt%)
Co
(wt%)
Mn
(wt%)
Ni
(wt%)
Ag
(wt%)
Se
(wt%)
337 po1
Massive Ccp + Po
59.69 38.67 <0.05 0.07 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
337
po3
Massive Ccp
+ Po 59.55 38.70 <0.05 0.01 0.10 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
337 po2
Massive Ccp + Po
59.19 38.56 <0.05 <0.05 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
321
po9
Massive Ccp
+ Po 58.76 39.22 <0.05 0.12 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
321 po8
Massive Ccp + Po
58.73 39.38 0.15 <0.05 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.07
321
po7
Massive Ccp
+ Po 59.41 38.61 <0.05 <0.05 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
321 po5
Massive Ccp + Po
58.98 39.26 <0.05 <0.05 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05
321
po6
Massive Ccp
+ Po 59.08 39.33 <0.05 <0.05 0.15 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
321 po4
Massive Ccp + Po
59.33 39.09 <0.05 <0.05 <0.08 0.15 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
321
po1
Massive Ccp
+ Po 59.37 38.44 <0.05 <0.05 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.09
321
po2
Massive Ccp
+ Po 59.37 38.37 <0.05 <0.05 0.09 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
321
po3
Massive Ccp
+ Po 58.94 38.74 <0.05 0.08 <0.08 0.15 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.06
71
Appendix 8 Electron microprobe data for sphalerite
Smp Type Zn
(wt%)
Fe
(wt%)
S
(wt%)
Cu
(wt%)
Cd
(wt%)
Bi
(wt%)
Co
(wt%)
Mn
(wt%)
Ni
(wt%)
EL27sph 2
Sulfide breccia
62.819 2.772 32.48 0.495 0.156 0.149 0 0.095 <0.05
EL27sph
1
Sulfide
breccia 64.165 2.394 32.278 0.186 0.207 0.137 0 0.073 <0.05
801 sph3 Sulfide breccia
51.272 8.94 32.913 5.507 0.169 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05
801 sph2 Sulfide
breccia 59.548 5.739 32.429 <0.05 0.172 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05
801 sph1 Sulfide breccia
60.005 5.702 32.6 <0.05 0.146 0.152 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05
801 sph4 Sulfide
breccia 60.589 5.562 32.931 <0.05 0.146 <0.08 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05
801 sph5 Sulfide breccia
59.782 6.019 32.457 <0.05 0.168 0.139 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05
801 sph6 Sulfide
breccia 60.875 5.59 32.561 <0.05 0.188 0.15 <0.12 <0.05 <0.05
72
Appendix 9 Electron microprobe data for chlorite (based on 18 oxygen’s, in wt%)
Smp Type SiO2
(wt%)
TiO2
(wt%)
Al2O3
(wt%)
Cr2O3
(wt%)
MgO
(wt%)
CaO
(wt%)
FeO
(wt%)
Na2O
(wt%)
K2O
(wt%)
H2O
(wt%)
Calc.
T (°C)
347 chl 1
Stockwork
25.45 0.06 20.74 0.00 11.92 0.04 29.47 0.01 0.00 11.15 344.41
347
chl 2
Stockwo
rk 26.04 0.05 21.60 0.00 13.29 0.06 26.46 0.01 0.00 11.35 339.26
347 chl 3
Stockwork
25.55 0.04 20.60 0.03 11.12 0.06 30.37 0.00 0.01 11.11 337.65
347
chl 4
Stockwo
rk 25.46 0.07 21.60 0.00 13.37 0.79 27.13 0.02 0.00 11.37 361.16
216 chl 1
Stockwork
25.25 0.03 19.57 0.01 11.84 0.06 28.31 0.02 0.00 10.86 326.70
216
chl 2
Stockwo
rk 25.61 0.04 19.61 0.03 11.86 0.05 28.17 0.03 0.00 10.91 319.30
216 chl 4
Stockwork
25.82 0.01 20.29 0.00 12.25 0.06 28.21 0.02 0.01 11.10 327.03
318
chl 1
Stockwo
rk 24.49 0.04 20.60 0.00 8.32 0.03 32.39 0.19 0.07 10.73 344.41
318 chl 2
Stockwork
24.97 0.14 20.60 0.00 9.92 0.04 31.10 0.06 0.02 10.93 342.80
318
chl 3
Stockwo
rk 24.47 0.03 21.31 0.00 9.32 0.02 31.43 0.08 0.02 10.88 356.97
318
chl 4
Stockwo
rk 25.49 0.04 21.04 0.05 11.38 0.05 29.36 0.00 0.00 11.13 341.19
EL42
chl 4
Sulfide
breccia 29.06 0.04 18.08 0.00 19.32 0.05 20.58 0.00 0.00 11.67 264.24
EL42
chl 6
Sulfide
breccia 28.42 0.00 18.10 0.03 19.29 0.04 20.17 0.02 0.01 11.53 274.22
EL42
chl 5
Sulfide
breccia 27.51 0.04 18.09 0.08 18.26 0.02 21.46 0.01 0.00 11.34 304.17
EL42
chl 3
Sulfide
breccia 29.99 0.02 16.53 0.00 20.67 0.03 19.69 0.00 0.00 11.71 235.91
EL42
chl 2
Sulfide
breccia 29.61 0.02 17.77 0.02 20.36 0.03 20.13 0.00 0.00 11.84 258.12
EL42
chl 1
Sulfide
breccia 29.26 0.01 18.30 0.02 20.00 0.03 19.47 0.00 0.00 11.75 263.60
321
chl1
Massive
sulfide 28.33 0.04 17.34 0.00 16.35 0.04 25.78 0.01 0.00 11.44 268.43
321
chl2
Massive
sulfide 28.60 0.09 16.38 0.00 15.42 0.05 26.96 0.01 0.00 11.30 248.46
321
chl3
Massive
sulfide 32.60 0.04 14.10 0.03 16.16 0.03 26.40 0.04 0.00 11.69 149.29
73
Appendix 10 δ
34S values for pyrite, chalcopyrite, sphalerite, and pyrrhotite, Turgeon deposit.
Sample Py (‰) Ccp (‰) Po (‰) Sp (‰) T (°C) Py-Ccp T (°C) Py-Sp
J344204 6.4
J344211 6.2
J344215 7.3
J344336 7.7 7.7 397-787
J344346 10.0
J344320 6.4
J344322 6.2
J344313 7.0
J344337 7.0 6.4 304-726
EL-27 6.2
EL-40 7.5
EL-41 7.1
J347006 6.0
J344326 6.0
J344321 6.1 5.9
J344312 5.8
J344327 6.2
J344205 6.9
J347010 7.7
J344801 8.9
J344800 6.7
74
Appendix 11 Comparative mean base and precious metal concentrations between Turgeon and VMS horizons in the BMC
(Goodfellow and McCutcheon, 2003)
Stratmat Brunswick Caribou Turgeon
Se (ppm) 2.1 60 26 156
In (ppm) 25 37 12 12
Cd (ppm) 245 131 117 4.5
Ag (ppm) 94 80 56 3.67
Au (ppb) 781 471 862 <2
Co (ppm) 15 343 153 295
Pb (wt. %) 2.88 1.86 1.43 0.003
Cu (wt. %) 0.72 0.5 0.78 1.5
Zn (wt. %) 12.27 6.32 4.48 4