Skip to content
BY 4.0 license Open Access Published by De Gruyter Open Access February 16, 2023

Metallogenic model of the Hongqiling Cu–Ni sulfide intrusions, Central Asian Orogenic Belt: Insight from long-period magnetotellurics

  • Zhi-He Xu , Guan-Wen Gu EMAIL logo , Ji-Yi Jiang , Fei-Da Li and Xing-Guo Niu
From the journal Open Geosciences

Abstract

The Hongqiling magmatic Cu–Ni sulfide deposit is one of the most important deposits in the easternmost segment of the Central Asian Metallogenic Belt, northeast China. However, the existence or non-existence of magmatic chambers is still not been determined, which is the key to decipher the formation of Hongqiling Cu–Ni deposit. Therefore, this study proposes to adopt long-period magnetotellurics method to image the deep-seated metallogenic system in Hongqiling Cu–Ni deposit. Two-dimensional (2D) nonlinear conjugate gradient inversion technology allows us to describe entire magma plumbing system, including the mantle-derived magma channels (banded low-resistivity anomalies), deep separated chamber (low-resistivity anomaly C2), and shallow magma conduits (low-resistivity anomaly C1). These results indicated that the mantle-derived primitive magma gave rise to the parental magma for the mafic–ultramafic intrusions in Hongqiling Cu–Ni deposit and triggered the segregation of Cu–Ni sulfides in the shallow chamber. By combining the experimental simulation, geochemistry, geochronology, and geotectonics data in the study area, we suggest that the partial melting processes which produced the large magma plumbing system probably have been triggered by lithospheric delamination.

1 Introduction

As an ultimate case of small intrusions that produced large to giant magmatic deposits, Hongqiling magmatic Cu–Ni sulfide deposit has been concerned and researched widely by geologists [1,2,3,4]. Extensive geochemical and geochronological data have been previously reported and have established some key hypotheses for the mineralization and tectono-magmatic evolution including:

  1. The differentiation of a single mantle-derived magma [5];

  2. Multi-stage sulfide segregation in different magma conduits [6];

  3. A crust–mantle interaction model [7]; and

  4. An asthenosphere underplating lithospheric mantle model [8].

In these models, it is generally accepted that the primitive for these ore-fertile magmas originated from partial melting of the upper mantle and then experienced complex evolution including multi-stage sulfide segregations in deep magma chambers. However, the existence or non-existence of magmatic chambers, and the size and morphology of them at depth, is still not been determined, which brings challenge to the applicability of existing metallogenic models to Hongqiling listed above. Long-period magnetotellurics (MT) has been used in depicting the deep magma plumbing system and structures in the lithospheric domain [9,10]. Based on the long-period MT results and previous studies, we propose a metallogenic model to illustrate the magmatic evolution and the formation of Hongqiling Cu–Ni deposit.

2 Geological setting

The Hongqiling mafic–ultramafic intrusions in the easternmost segment of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt (CAOB) are distributed north side of the northeast Dunhua-Mishan fault [7] (Figure 1a). The CAOB is bounded in the north by the Siberian Block and in the south by the Tarim and North China blocks and has traditionally been referred to as a series of orogenic or fold belts [11,12]. During the period from the Permian to the Triassic, the final closure of the Paleo-Asian Ocean occurred, and extensive ore-bearing mafic–ultramafic intrusions were subsequently extensively emplaced from the west to the east (e.g., Kalatongke, Poyi, Huangshandong, Huangshanxi, Huangshannan, Tianyu, Erbutu, Chajianling, Hongqiling, and Piaohechuan) [13,14,15,16,17,18] (Figure 1a). The formation ages of these intrusions indicate the diachronous closure of the Paleo-Asian Ocean from the west to the east [19,20].

Figure 1 
               (a) Simplified geological map of the CAOB showing the distribution of Cu–Ni–(PGE) sulfide deposits in China, and the sizes of Ni resources. (b) Regional geologic map showing the distribution of the Chajianliang–Hongqiling–Piaohechuan mafic–ultramafic intrusions in the central Jilin area.
Figure 1

(a) Simplified geological map of the CAOB showing the distribution of Cu–Ni–(PGE) sulfide deposits in China, and the sizes of Ni resources. (b) Regional geologic map showing the distribution of the Chajianliang–Hongqiling–Piaohechuan mafic–ultramafic intrusions in the central Jilin area.

3 Long-period MT method

3.1 Data acquisition and processing

Long-period MT data were collected along a north–south-trending section (251 km) from the North China Craton (NCC) to Song Liao Basin (SLB), which vertically cut across the east–west-directed accretion of the East Asian Pre-Pacific Province (Figure 2). This included 22 MT sites at intervals between 3 and 15 km.

Figure 2 
                  Topography and main tectonic boundaries in the central Jilin area. The red rectangle outlines the Hongqiling Cu–Ni deposit. The black circles indicate the long-period MT site locations of the section that originates in the NCC and passes through the middle of the Zhang Guang Cai Ling (ZGCL), before extending to the SLB.
Figure 2

Topography and main tectonic boundaries in the central Jilin area. The red rectangle outlines the Hongqiling Cu–Ni deposit. The black circles indicate the long-period MT site locations of the section that originates in the NCC and passes through the middle of the Zhang Guang Cai Ling (ZGCL), before extending to the SLB.

Long-period MT data were acquired using an Aether 200 instrument (Crystal Earth Co., Ltd., USA) with a collection time of no more less than 10 h and a period range of 0.001–1,000 s. Then, this time series are processed by a statistically robust algorithm [21]. The data from each MT site include five components: two horizontal electric field components (E x and E y ), two horizontal magnetic components (H x and H y ), and one vertical magnetic component (H z ). Information regarding lithospheric geoelectric structure can be embodied by the apparent resistivities (ρ a) and phases (φ) [22]. Figure 3 displays the apparent resistivity (R xy or R yx ) and impedance phase (φ xy and φ yx ) curves of partial sites and the error bars are corresponding to the measurement errors of the observed data. The MT skin depth is the depth at which the MT field attenuates to (1/e) of its amplitude at the surface of the Earth [23] and can be calculated by equation (1):

(1) δ = 2 ρ / ( μ ω ) = 503 ρ / f ,

where δ, ρ, μ, ω, and f represent the skin depth, bulk resistivity, magnetic permeability, angular frequency, and frequency, respectively. In geological terrains with a high resistivity, the MT signal has a larger penetration depth [24,25]. In this study, the bulk resistivity was estimated to be about 300 Ω m, and the lowest frequency was estimated to be 0.003 Hz. The skin depth and effective detection depth were nearly 160 and 100 km, respectively.

Figure 3 
                  Curves of partial long-period MT sites. (a–c) Observed resistivity curves for sites 1, 4, 17, and 20 from the transverse electric (TE) (R
                     
                        xy
                     ) and transverse magnetic ™ (R
                     
                        yx
                     ) model apparent resistivity curves. (a′–c′) The impedance phase curves of the TE (φ
                     
                        xy
                     ) and TM (φ
                     
                        yx
                     ) models.
Figure 3

Curves of partial long-period MT sites. (a–c) Observed resistivity curves for sites 1, 4, 17, and 20 from the transverse electric (TE) (R xy ) and transverse magnetic ™ (R yx ) model apparent resistivity curves. (a′–c′) The impedance phase curves of the TE (φ xy ) and TM (φ yx ) models.

3.2 Analysis and inversion

After data processing, the phase-impedance tensor decomposition is used to estimate the regional dimensions [22]. The pseudosection map of resistivity inversion in Figure 4 shows that the 2D deviations vary with frequency. The value of the 2D deviations is generally less than 0.3 over different frequencies [26]. Only a few sites in low frequencies exhibit large 2D deviation values. This result indicates that the long-period MT section is generally compliance with 2D inversion [27].

Figure 4 
                  Pseudosection map. The 2D deviations vary with frequency.
Figure 4

Pseudosection map. The 2D deviations vary with frequency.

The geoelectric strike can be identified by the rose diagram [22]. Data in the frequency bands 100–1 Hz showed geoelectric strikes in the range N50°E–N60°E and S30°E–S40°E. Data in the frequency bands 0.1–0.001 Hz showed geoelectric strikes in the range N60°E–N80°E and S10°E–S30°E (Figure 5). The NE-NNE regional geological strike directions correlate well with the geoelectric strike. Moreover, the distribution of Carboniferous to Permian subduction-related igneous rocks have been found to be generally related to the north–south-directed subduction that accompanied the east–west closure of the Paleo-Asian Ocean [2]. Thus, the inherent 90° ambiguity could be resolved well and the data were rotated into a S20°E direction [28].

Figure 5 
                  Results of the tensor decomposition and rose diagram of the main electrical axes. The red wedges correspond to the two solutions for the strike direction.
Figure 5

Results of the tensor decomposition and rose diagram of the main electrical axes. The red wedges correspond to the two solutions for the strike direction.

The inversion was consistent with the 2D nonlinear conjugate gradient (NLCG) inversion in the TE and TM modes [29]. The inversion models were discretized by a grid size of 46 × 90 in the X and Y directions with an initial uniform half-space resistivity of 100 Ω m. To ascertain the optimum value for the root mean square (RMS) misfit and the roughness for the 2D NLCG inversion, a number of inversions were performed [25]. We finally choose the parameter τ = 10 for the regularization factor [22]. After 200 iterations, the model responses are well fitted to the observed data, and the preferred model is obtained with an average normalized RMS of 2.12 for all sites.

3.3 Model test

To verify that the preferred model was properly inversed, the long-period MT result was test by some forward modeling (Figure 6). First, the C1 and C2 anomalies are displaced by 100 and 300 Ω m in forward model 1 and model 2. Then, forward calculation was adopted to assess the impact. The average normalized RMS misfits increase from 2.32 to 3.24 in forward model 1, and this trend is more sharply in forward model 2.

Figure 6 
                  Model assessments verify the sensitivity of MT data. In (a)–(c), the preferred inversion model result; the forward model 1 which displaced the C1 and C2 anomalies with the 100 Ω m; the forward model 2 which displaced the C1 and C2 anomalies with the 300 Ω m.
Figure 6

Model assessments verify the sensitivity of MT data. In (a)–(c), the preferred inversion model result; the forward model 1 which displaced the C1 and C2 anomalies with the 100 Ω m; the forward model 2 which displaced the C1 and C2 anomalies with the 300 Ω m.

Figure 7 shows the results of 12 and 13 sites data fitting. The preferred inversion fitting curve (the purple) fits well with the observed data, while the modified model response curve (the green and red) cannot fit well under the period of 10 s. The forward model test results indicate that reliability of C1 and C1 anomalies in preferred inversion.

Figure 7 
                  Site-by-site RMS misfits for the preferred model, the modified model 1 and the modified model 2. (a) The RMS of each site. In (b) and (c), the inversion results of the resistivity and phase curves. The red and blue triangles represent the observed Ryx and Rxy model data. The blue curve, the green curve, and the red curve represent the preferred inversion result, the model 1, and the model 2 results, respectively.
Figure 7

Site-by-site RMS misfits for the preferred model, the modified model 1 and the modified model 2. (a) The RMS of each site. In (b) and (c), the inversion results of the resistivity and phase curves. The red and blue triangles represent the observed Ryx and Rxy model data. The blue curve, the green curve, and the red curve represent the preferred inversion result, the model 1, and the model 2 results, respectively.

3.4 Interpretation of the MT profile result

The high-resolution lithospheric electrical properties were inversed using the 2D NLCG method and long-period MT data (Figure 8). The lithospheric geoelectric structure was found to be generally consistent with the major surface geological features. Based on the locations of regional faults and the similarities and differences in the inversion model, the long-period MT section was laterally divided into three segments: the NCC, ZGCL, and SLB [30] (Figure 8).

Figure 8 
                  (a) Elevation of the long-period section. (b) 2D resistivity model obtained following NLCG inversion of the TM data. The gray curve represents the topographic relief, the black triangle represents the MT site position, and the black cross represents the inversion depth. The low-resistivity geological bodies are represented by C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, and C7, while the high-resistivity geological bodies are represented by R1 and R2.
Figure 8

(a) Elevation of the long-period section. (b) 2D resistivity model obtained following NLCG inversion of the TM data. The gray curve represents the topographic relief, the black triangle represents the MT site position, and the black cross represents the inversion depth. The low-resistivity geological bodies are represented by C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, and C7, while the high-resistivity geological bodies are represented by R1 and R2.

In the ZGCL segment, at sites 7–10, a sudden change in the resistivity was observed, where the value decreased by one order magnitude from 700 to 60 Ω m. According to the previous research, this structure is understood to be loose, fractured, and filled with some low-resistivity filling materials [31] (Figure 8). Moreover, seismic imaging revealed a transition zone between high- and low-velocity anomalies, which is consistent with the site of the long-period MT survey. Thus, we infer that this structure, exposed near site 7, dipped steeply to the north is the Dunhua–Mishan fault [30]. At sites 7–11 and sites 15–17, two low-resistivity anomalies (C1 and C3) were observed with the resistivity values of 101.8 and 101.6 Ω m in the upper crust (Figure 8). The petrophysical parameter of minerals such as the ore-bearing amphibolite pyroxenite, altered gabbro, and Cu–Ni sulfides are characterized by low-resistivity anomalies (Table 1). In addition, according to the deep seismic-reflection sections in the CAOB, the short and strong reflections represent multiple volcanisms [32]. Thus, we infer that the low-resistivity anomalies C1 and C3 may represent the relics of ancient shallow magma chambers emplaced in the Triassic.

Table 1

Petrophysical data for Hongqiling Cu-Ni deposit in Jilin province

Name Number Geological age Specific resistivity (average)
log10  ρ (Ω m)
Altered Gabbro 25 Triassic 2.23
Amphibole pyroxenite 20 Triassic 3.23
Ore-bearing Pyroxenite 6 Triassic 2.06
Ore body 5 Triassic 1.72
Biotite gneiss 23 Ordovician 3.38
Mica schist 10 Ordovician 3.45
Skarn siliceous marble 20 Ordovician 3.44
Amphibole gneiss 10 Archaean 3.96
Granitic gneiss 22 Archaean 4.05
Fracture zone 4 Unknown 2.16

Vertically, the lithospheric geoelectric structure could be generally segmented into three layers. The first layer with an resistivity value ranging from 102.5 to 104.1 Ω m (except for conductor C1) represents crust at a depth from 28 to 40 km [32]. The crustal structure beneath northeastern China as imaged by the Northeast China Extended Seismic (NECESS) Array receiver indicates that the Moho depth varies from 26.7 to 42.3 km from the NCC to the SLB [33]. Thus, we argue that the first geoelectric layer represents the Moho depth (Figure 8). In Section 3.1, we have calculated the skin depth was nearly 160 km. Thus, the second layer with a value of 102.0 to 102.5 Ω m at depths from 52 to 100 km represents the lithospheric mantle, and the third layer with a value of 101.8 to 102.0 Ω m represents upwelling asthenosphere. Geomagnetic three-component depth sounding and terrestrial heat-flow data acquired for the region between Changchun and Tonghua had similar trends to that in our data [34]. Furthermore, previous deep exploration investigations showed that the lithosphere–asthenosphere boundary (LAB) depths in this region are marked on the MT section [35] (Xiong et al., 2011, p. 31). In addition, considering the fact that the study area is located near the Solonker Suture and far away from the Jiayin–Mudanjiang Suture, we infer that its geoelectric structure should be closely related to the evolution of the Paleo-Asian Ocean rather than the evolution of the Paleo-Pacific Ocean. Moreover, Jurassic magmatism (185–158 Ma) in the Hongqiling deposit has been found to be dominated by granitoids with few mafic–ultramafic rocks, which indicates that the degree of upwelling of the asthenosphere and the reworking of the LAB were quite limited during the Late to Middle Mesozoic evolution [3].

4 Discussion

4.1 Partial melting of the mantle

Ore-fertile magma formed by high degree of partial melting of the mantle generally has high Ni/Cu ratio and low Pd/Ir ratio [6]. In geophysics, minute quantities of partial melting can have a tremendous influence on the overall electrical performances [37]. Thus, resistivity can be used to estimate the volume of fluid/melt that is present in the mantle, although the geothermal model of the lithosphere requires simplification prior to calculating the degree of partial melting of the mantle. The geotemperature is 1,300 K at the depth of 50 km, and then, the geothermal gradient increment is 0.4 K/km [33] (Figure 9). The resistivity of olivine, which has a variable fluid content that ranges from 0 to 1,000 ppm, can be obtained using the Grades laboratory database [38]. The Grades laboratory database states that the resistivity of dry olivine with a olivine fluid content of 350 ppm ranges from 60 and 120 Ω m (conductivity of 0.0083–0.0167 S/m) (Figure 9). However, at the same depth, the long-period MT section had a resistivity of ∼50 Ω m (conductivity of 0.02 S/m) between sites 10 and 13, which had lower resistivity than that the olivine fluid content of 350 ppm (Figure 9). The preferred explanation is that Hongqiling ore-bearing mafic-ultramafic intrusions are generally produced by the partially melting of mantle.

Figure 9 
                  Lithospheric mantle resistivity; at a depth of 50–400 km, and a fluid content of 350–1,000 ppm, as computed from laboratory results of Karato and Dai [36].
Figure 9

Lithospheric mantle resistivity; at a depth of 50–400 km, and a fluid content of 350–1,000 ppm, as computed from laboratory results of Karato and Dai [36].

4.2 Mineralization model of Cu–Ni sulfide deposits

Long-period MT section successfully imaged the Dun-Mi structures which formed the magma conduit system for mantle-derived metalliferous magmas intrusion and fluids migration through the crust, as well as the shallow chamber (C1), the deep chamber chamber (C2), and the emplacement of the ore-bearing intrusions.

Positive εNd(t) value (3–5) of Hongqiling mafic-ultramafic intrusions indicated that [6]. The long-period MT section imaged the partial melting magma intruded the middle crust and formed a shallow chamber (C1) (Figure 10a). Wu et al. reported that the extensive distribution of Late Triassic A-type granites was the result of the direct partial melting of the juvenile crust [39]. We note that upwelling in the asthenosphere can realize such high temperatures and that mafic–ultramafic intrusions are generally coeval with the A-type granites in this region [3]. Thus, we suggest that the deep, separated chamber may have assimilated the SiO2-rich A2-type granites that were formed by underplated mantle-derived magma and that this triggered the PGE sulfide segregation prior to emplacement. The PGE-depleted magma subsequently intruded into the shallow chamber (C1) and then underwent variable degrees of crustal contamination before generating the second-stage sulfide segregation [6] (Figure 10b). In summary, the mineralization process involved voluminous, undersaturated, sulfide-mafic magma passing through the large magma plumbing system, where it reached sulfur saturation due to the addition of additional crust materials and triggered sulfide segregation [3]. The lithospheric-scale Dun–Mi structure and its secondary structures control the magma conduit system in the study area (Figure 10c).

Figure 10 
                  Simplified schematic representation of the tectono-magmatic evolution and mineralization in the Hongqiling ore-bearing intrusions. (a) Long-period MT section images of the low-resistivity bodies (C1 and C2). (b) Geological interpretation based on the long-period MT results. (c) The processing of multi-time immiscible segregations in the deep chamber.
Figure 10

Simplified schematic representation of the tectono-magmatic evolution and mineralization in the Hongqiling ore-bearing intrusions. (a) Long-period MT section images of the low-resistivity bodies (C1 and C2). (b) Geological interpretation based on the long-period MT results. (c) The processing of multi-time immiscible segregations in the deep chamber.

The top surface of the low-resistivity body in the upper mantle was consisent with the LAB. The trend of gradual thinning in the first layer indicates that a rapid uplift event occurred in this region. The depth variation in the third layer reflects the various degrees of asthenospheric upwelling, which suggests an extensional geodynamic regime that was probably induced by delamination. The volume of mafic–ultramafic magma in the shallow and deep chambers (C1 and C2) was found to be much larger than the volume of surface ore-related intrusions. This indicates that the strong extensional geodynamics regime in the study area is associated with intensive mantle-derived magmatism.

Three potential geodynamic processes could have formed such a large volume of mafic–ultramafic magma and the associated huge magmatic Cu–Ni–PGE deposits: (i) a mantle plume [39]; (ii) slab breakoff [40]; and (iii) lithospheric delamination [3]. First, it is impossible that a mantle plume existed during the Triassic when the CAOB was strongly associated with the evolution of the Paleo-Asian Ocean. Second, unlike delamination, slab breakoff cannot trigger a significant thermal perturbation in the overriding lithosphere; thus, slab breakoff cannot account for the intensive magmatism or additional diverse nature of the magmatic observations [41,42,43]. Therefore, the generation of intensive mafic–ultramafic magmatism was triggered by the intensive delamination of the lithosphere. Besides, the long-period MT section from the south Inner Mongolia to the Bainaimiao provided an image of the residual lithosphere in the asthenosphere [13]. Thus, we inferred that the genesis of the Hongqiling Cu–Ni deposits is related to lithospheric delamination.

5 Conclusions

  1. The long-period MT section allowed the inversion of entire magma plumbing system, including the mantle-derived magma channels, deep separated chamber, and shallow magma conduits;

  2. By combining the experimental simulation with findings of previous studies, we inclined that the primary magma of Hongqiling was formed by partial melting of the mantle, which are triggered by lithospheric delamination.

Acknowledgments

This research has been funded by the Engineering Research Center of Geothermal Resources Development Technology and Equipment, Ministry of Education, Jilin University and Science and Technology Plan Project, Langfang Heibei province.

  1. Funding information: This research benefited from the support of Science and Technology Research Project in Higher Learning Institutions of Hebei Province (ZC2022106); Science and Technology Plan Project, Langfang (2022013081); Engineering Research Center of Geothermal Resources Development Technology and Equipment, Ministry of Education (22006), Jilin University, Changchun, 130026, China; and Shandong Provincial Engineering Laboratory of Application and Development of Big Data for Deep Gold Exploration Funds (SDK202221).

  2. Author contributions: ZHX designed the surveys and carried them out. GWG performed the geophysical data processing. JYJ, FDL, and XGN draw relevant diagrams and prepared the article with contributions from all co-authors.

  3. Conflict of interest: We declare that we have no financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that can inappropriately influence our work; there is no professional or other personal interest of any nature or kind in any product, service, and/or company that could be construed as influencing the position presented in, or the review of, the manuscript entitled, “Metallogenic model of the Hongqiling Cu–Ni sulfide intrusions, Central Asian Orogenic Belt: Insight from long period magnetotellurics”.

References

[1] Tang ZL, Ren DJ, Xue ZR, Mu YL. Nickel deposits of China. In: Editorial committee of mineral deposits, China, editors. Mineral deposits of China. Vol. 2. Beijing: Geological Publishing House; 1992. p. 59–99.Search in Google Scholar

[2] Xiao WJ, Windley BF, Hao J, Zhai MG. Accretion leading to collision and the Permian Solonker suture, Inner Mongolia, China: Termination of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Tectonics. 2003;22:1069.10.1029/2002TC001484Search in Google Scholar

[3] Wu FY, Wilde SA, Zhang GL, Sun DY. Geochronology and petrogenesis of the post-orogenic Cu–Ni sulfide-bearing mafic–ultramafic complexes in Jilin province, NE China. J Asian Earth Sci. 2004;23:781–97.10.1016/S1367-9120(03)00114-7Search in Google Scholar

[4] Hao LB, Zhao X, Boorder DH, Lu JL, Zhao YY, Wei QQ. Origin of PGE depletion of Triassic magmatic Cu–Ni sulfide deposits in the central-southern area of Jilin province, NE China. Ore Geol Rev. 2014;63:226–37.10.1016/j.oregeorev.2014.05.017Search in Google Scholar

[5] Konnikov EG, Yan HQ, Xi AH, Deyou S. Sulfide nickel deposits of the Hongqiling ore field (Jilin Province, China). Geol Ore Depos. 2004;46:299–306.Search in Google Scholar

[6] Wei B, Wang CY, Li C, Sun Y. Origin of PGE-depleted Ni–Cu sulfide mineralization in the Triassic Hongqiling No. 7 orthopyroxenite intrusion, central Asian orogenic belt, northeastern China. Econ Geol. 2013;108:1813–31.10.2113/econgeo.108.8.1813Search in Google Scholar

[7] Lü LS, Mao JW, Li HB, Franco P, Zhang ZH, Zhou ZH. Pyrrhotite Re–Os and SHRIMP zircon U-Pb dating of the Hongqiling Ni–Cu sulfide deposits in Northeast China. Ore Geol Rev. 2011;43:106–19.10.1016/j.oregeorev.2011.02.003Search in Google Scholar

[8] Xie W, Song XY, Deng YF, Wang YS, Ba DH, Zheng WQ, et al. Geochemistry and petrogenetic implications of a Late Devonian mafic–ultramafic intrusion at the southern margin of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Lithos. 2012;144:209–30.10.1016/j.lithos.2012.03.010Search in Google Scholar

[9] Dong ZY, Tang J, Unsworth M, Chen XB. Electrical resistivity structure of the upper mantle beneath Northeastern China: Implications for rheology and the mechanism of craton destruction. J Asian Earth Sci. 2015;100:115–31.10.1016/j.jseaes.2015.01.008Search in Google Scholar

[10] Yang B, Gary D, Egbert AK, Naser MM. Three-dimensional electrical resistivity of the north-central USA from EarthScope long period magnetotelluric data. Earth Planet Sci Lett. 2015;422:87–93.10.1016/j.epsl.2015.04.006Search in Google Scholar

[11] Kovalenko VI, Yarmolyuk VV, Kovach VP, Kotov AB. Isotope provinces, mechanisms of generation and sources of the continental crust in the Central Asian mobile belt: geological and isotopic evidence. J Asian Earth Sci. 2004;23:605–27.10.1016/S1367-9120(03)00130-5Search in Google Scholar

[12] Li JY, Zhang J, Yang TN, Li YP, Sun GH, Zhu ZX, et al. Crustal tectonic division and evolution of the southern part of the North Asian Orogenic Region and its adjacent areas. J Jilin Univ (Earth Sci Ed). 2009;39(4):584–605 (in Chinese with English abstract).Search in Google Scholar

[13] Han BF, Ji JQ, Song B, Chen LH, Li ZH. SHRIMP zircon U-Pb ages and implications of the Kalatongke and Huangshandong sulfide-bearing mafic–ultramafic intrusions. Chin Sci Bull. 2004;49:2324–28 (in Chinese with English abstract).10.1360/04wd0163Search in Google Scholar

[14] Gao YQ, Liu L, Hu WX. Petrology and isotopic geochemistry of dawsonite-bearing sandstones in Hailaer basin, northeastern China. Appl Geochem. 2009;24:1724–38.10.1016/j.apgeochem.2009.05.002Search in Google Scholar

[15] Zhou MF, Lesher CM, Yang ZX, Li JW, Sun M. Geochemistry and petrogenesis of 270 Ma Ni–Cu-(PGE) sulfide-bearing mafic intrusions in the Huangshan district, Eastern Xinjiang, Northwest China: implications for the tectonic evolution of the Central Asian orogenic belt. Chem Geol. 2004;209:233–57.10.1016/j.chemgeo.2004.05.005Search in Google Scholar

[16] Mao JW, Pirajno F, Zhang ZH, Chai FM, Wu H, Chen SP, et al. A review of the Cu–Ni sulphide deposits in the Chinese Tianshan and Altay orogens (Xinjiang Autonomous Region, NW China): Principal characteristics and ore-forming processes. J Asian Earth Sci. 2008;32:184–203.10.1016/j.jseaes.2007.10.006Search in Google Scholar

[17] Qin KZ, Su BX, Sakyi PA, Tang DM, Li XH, Sun H, et al. SIMS zircon U-Pb geochronology and Sr-Nd isotopes of Ni–Cu-bearing mafic–ultramafic intrusions in Eastern tianshan and Beishan in correlation with flood basalts in Tarim basin (NW China): Constraints on a Ca. 280 Ma mantle plume. Am J Sci. 2011;311:237–60.10.2475/03.2011.03Search in Google Scholar

[18] Lu YG, Lesher CM, Deng J. Geochemistry and genesis of magmatic Ni–Cu-(PGE) and PGE-(Cu)–(Ni) deposits in China. Ore Geol Rev. 2019;107:863–87.10.1016/j.oregeorev.2019.03.024Search in Google Scholar

[19] Li JY. Permian geodynamic setting of Northeast China and adjacent regions: closure of the Paleo-Asian Ocean and subduction of the Paleo-Pacific Plate. J Asian Earth Sci. 2006;26:207–24.10.1016/j.jseaes.2005.09.001Search in Google Scholar

[20] Wilhem C, Windley BF, Stampfli GM. The Altaids of Central Asia: a tectonic and evolutionary innovative review. Earth Sci Rev. 2012;113(3–4):303–41.10.1016/j.earscirev.2012.04.001Search in Google Scholar

[21] Xue S, Bai DH, Chen Y, Ma XB, Chen L, Li X, et al. Contrasting crustal deformation mechanisms in the longmenshan and West Qinling orogenic belts, NE Tibet, revealed by magnetotelluric data. J Asian Earth Sci. 2019;176:120–8.10.1016/j.jseaes.2019.01.039Search in Google Scholar

[22] McNeice GW, Jones AG. Multisite multi-frequency tensor decomposition of magnetotelluric data. Geophysics. 2001;66:158–73.10.1190/1.1444891Search in Google Scholar

[23] Roshan KS, Ved PM, Shalivahan, Sahendra S. Imaging Regional Geology and Au – Sulphide mineralization over Dhanjori greenstone belt: Implications from 3-D inversion of audio magnetotelluric data and petrophysical characterization. Ore Geol Rev. 2019;106:369–86.10.1016/j.oregeorev.2019.01.027Search in Google Scholar

[24] Simpson F, Bahr K. Practical magnetotellurics: Numerical forward modelling. Cambridge London: Cambridge University Press; 2005.10.1017/CBO9780511614095Search in Google Scholar

[25] Singh RK, Maurya VP, Shalivahan, Singh S. Imaging regional geology and Au - Sulphide mineralization over Dhanjori greenstone belt: Implications from 3-D inversion of audio magnetotelluric data and petrophysical characterization. Ore Geol Rev. 2019;106:369–86.10.1016/j.oregeorev.2019.01.027Search in Google Scholar

[26] Swift C. A magnetotelluric investigation of an electrical conductivity anomaly in the southwestern United States, PhD thesis. 1967.Search in Google Scholar

[27] Booker JR. The magnetotelluric phase tensor: A critical review. Surv Geophys. 2014;35:7–40.10.1007/s10712-013-9234-2Search in Google Scholar

[28] Yin JN, Lindsay M, Teng SR. Mineral prospectivity analysis for BIF iron deposits: A case study in the Anshan-Benxi area, Liaoning province, North-East China. Ore Geol Rev. 2018;120:102746.10.1016/j.oregeorev.2018.11.019Search in Google Scholar

[29] Rodi W, Mackie RL. Nonlinear conjugate gradients algorithm for 2-D magnetotelluric inversion. Geophysics. 2000;66:174–87.10.1190/1.1444893Search in Google Scholar

[30] Liang HD, Gao R, Hou HS, Liu GS, Han JT, Han S. Lithospheric electrical structure of the Great Xing’an Range. J Asian Earth Sci. 2015;113:501–7.10.1016/j.jseaes.2015.01.026Search in Google Scholar

[31] Tian J, Ye G, Ding Z, Wu Q, Wei W, Jin S, et al. A study of the deep electrical structure of the northern segment of the tan-lu fault zone, ne china. J Asian Earth Sci. 2019;170:118–27.10.1016/j.jseaes.2018.10.029Search in Google Scholar

[32] Hou H, Wang H, Gao R, Li QS, Xiong XS, Li WH, et al. Fine crustal structure and deformation beneath the Great Xing'an Ranges, CAOB: Revealed by deep seismic reflection profile. Asian J Earth Sci. 2015;113:491–500.10.1016/j.jseaes.2015.01.030Search in Google Scholar

[33] Tao K, Niu FL, Ning JY, Chen J, Grand S. Crustal structure beneath NE China imaged by NECESSArray receiver function data. Earth Planet Sci Lett. 2014;398:48–57.10.1016/j.epsl.2014.04.043Search in Google Scholar

[34] Zhang GB, Shen NH. Geomagnetic three-components depth sounding and the electrical conductivity of the crust and upper mantle in Changchun and Tonghua. Chin J Geophys. 1994;37:296–303.Search in Google Scholar

[35] Xiong X, Gao R, Zhang X. Revealing Moho surface depth in North-Northeast China by deep seismological detection. Acta Geosci Sin. 2011;32:46–56.Search in Google Scholar

[36] Karato SI, Dai LD. Comments on “Electrical conductivity of wadsleyite as a function of temperature and water content” by Manthilake et al. Phys Earth Planet Inter. 2009;174:19–21.10.1016/j.pepi.2009.01.011Search in Google Scholar

[37] Bai DH, Unsworth MJ, Meju MA, Ma XB, Teng JW, Kong XR, et al. Crustal deformation of the eastern Tibetan plateau revealed by magnetotelluric imaging. Nat Geosci. 2010;3:358–62.10.1038/ngeo830Search in Google Scholar

[38] An MJ, Shi YL. Three-dimensional thermal structure of the Chinese continental crust and upper mantle. Chin Sci Bull. 2007;50(10):1441–51.10.1007/s11430-007-0071-3Search in Google Scholar

[39] Wu FY, Sun DY, Li H, Jahn BM, Wilde S. A-type granites in northeastern China: Age and geochemical constraints on their petrogenesis. Chem Geol. 2002;187:143–73.10.1016/S0009-2541(02)00018-9Search in Google Scholar

[40] Liu YG, Lü XB, Wu CM, Hu XG, Duan ZP. The migration of Tarim plume magma toward the northeast in Early Permian and its significance for the exploration of PGE-Cu–Ni magmatic sulfide deposits in Xinjiang, NW China: As suggested by Sr–Nd–Hf isotopes, sedimentology and geophysical data. Ore Geol Rev. 2016;72:538–45.10.1016/j.oregeorev.2015.07.020Search in Google Scholar

[41] Peng RM, Zhai YS, Li C, Ripley EM. The Erbutu Ni–Cu deposit in the Central Asian orogenic belt: a Permian magmatic sulfide deposit related to boninitic magmatism in an arc setting. Econ Geol. 2013;108:1879–88.10.2113/econgeo.108.8.1879Search in Google Scholar

[42] Freeburn R, Bouilhol P, Maunder B, Magni V, Van Hunen J. Numerical models of the magmatic processes induced by slab breakoff. Earth Planet Sci Lett. 2017;478:203–13.10.1016/j.epsl.2017.09.008Search in Google Scholar

[43] Lyros E, Kostelecky J, Plicka V. Detection of Tectonic and Crustal Deformation using GNSS Data Processing: The Case of PPGnet. Civ Eng J. 2021;7(1):14–23.10.28991/cej-2021-03091633Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2022-04-03
Revised: 2022-08-11
Accepted: 2022-10-12
Published Online: 2023-02-16

© 2023 the author(s), published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Downloaded on 1.3.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/geo-2022-0430/html
Scroll to top button