predictive mineral discovery CRC Conference Barossa Valley 1-3 June 2004

Systematic analysis of Archaean gold deposits

in a global context
Terry Lees
pmd*CRC, School of Geosciences, Monash University, Clayton VIC 3800
terry.lees@sci.monash.edu.au

Introduction
The paper describes the application of systematic taxonomy to hydrothermal mineral deposits.
The approach has been taken from biology, with the aim of looking at similarities and
relationships between various mineral deposits and groups, and deriving key characters of these
groups.
A major part of the analysis has been the development of a mineral deposit database containing
characters derived from the literature and mine visits. Presently there are 455 disparate, global,
hydrothermal mineral deposits, selected on the basis of containing comprehensive (at least
reliable) data available in the literature (typically at least two references); that they encompass a
broad range of conventional classes (“VHMS”, “MVT”, “porphyry Cu” etc.).
A list of characters was developed to describe observable features of the deposits in terms of fluid
inclusion data, ore deposit texture and geometry, reaction processes, host rock, ore mineralogy
and chemistry and alteration mineralogy and chemistry. Criteria for the characters include
generally available in the literature, that they describe key features of various deposits and
deposit classes and they are observable features (“facts”) that are not, as far as possible,
interpretations. Most of the 150 characters were scored on the basis of 0=absent, 1=minor
component or by-product, 2=major or abundant. Absolute values (eg. ore grades) were not
considered appropriate because of poorer data availability and lack of standard reporting;
however, some data related to fluid inclusions and ages are in absolute terms. In deposits not
comprehensively described, lack of a character is taken to mean "unknown" and scored as
"9999".
Data were run through several biological programs developed for phenetic (similarity) and
phylogenetic (cladistic) analysis to assess relationships. Although several types of software have
been used in prior tests, here we are concerned with PATN (Belbin, 1995), a largely phenetic
software. PATN determine different levels of division (How many groups?) and lists and
characters for those groups.
The mineral deposit database and analysis of it represent a new tool for the minerals industry, to
define groups of deposits based on their characteristics, in turn enabling better genetic and
exploration models. The tool has application to project generation in poorly known terranes (What
deposit types occur here and what are they like?) and in well-known terranes (What are the
natural groups and controlling factors?). In light of these results, exploration models may need to
be reviewed. An example is in the Archaean gold deposits, where most deposits fit the traditional
"shear-zone hosted" or "orogenic" model but some deposits and groups appear different.
Systematic Analysis of Global Mineral Deposit data
Analysis of the global data set produced a dendrogram which was simplified and (with
interpretation) condensed into various groups; often the classic deposit styles (Table 1), with the
main group characters. 21 deposit groups appear to reflect natural mineral deposit classes.
Fewer groups appear not to encompass the full range of natural deposit styles, while more groups
just subdivide the earlier ones.

111
predictive mineral discovery CRC Conference Barossa Valley 1-3 June 2004

Table 1. 21 groups with geological description and selected group characters (those with highest
percentage scores in characterisation)
Group Geological description Group Characters (from the A1 mineral deposi
database)
1/21 Sediment-hosted dissem Cu/Au/U parallel S0, quartz
2/21 Carbonate-hosted Pb-Zn Dolomite, galena, sphalerite, Pb, Zn
3/21 High-T carbonate replacement Rock reaction, pyrite, quartz
4/21 Skarn Pb Zn Cu Au W Rock reaction, limestone, replacement, garnet
5/21 Sed-hosted massive sulphide Pb-Zn shale-siltstone, massive sulphide, pyrite, sphalerite
Zn
6/21 VHMS Volcano-sediment, massive sulphide, Layered
parallel S0, sphalerite, Cu, Zn, chlorite, quartz
sericite/musc
7/21 Metamorphic-hosted massive sulphide massive sulphide, quartz, sphalerite, Zn
8/21 Epithermal Au plus others Vein, quartz, Au
9/21 Vein, porphyry, replacement Sn W Fluid pH<7, porphyry, quartz
10/21 Breccia-hosted Au-U-Cu Unmixing, Foverpressure, Breccia, bx-irregular
chlorite
11/21 Vein/replacement polymetallic Cooling, Ft/bx, fault/SZ, quartz
12/21 Porphyry Cu-Au Porphyry, Cu, K feldspar
13/21 High mm grade Au-other Rock reaction, quartz, Au
14/21 Au (possibly Granite-related?) Volcanic mafic, quartz, Au, quartz, sericite/musc
silicate other
15/21 Fe rich (oxide/sulphide) MM host, Replacement, Recrystallised, quartz, Au
biotite
16/21 * ElSoldado (group of 1) fluid pH<7, Vfels, Vint, pipe, multiple lens, Manto
bornite, calcite, Au, quartz, sericite/musc, silicate
other
17/21 Unusual Fe Salinity, CO2, MM host, folded, amphibole
18/21 Skarn-like Fe Cu U CO2, MM host, replacement
19/21 Ironstone-hosted Au Rock reaction, replacement, quartz, Au, Fe, U
20/21 Archaean Orogenic Au Salinity, Ft/bx, Vein, quartz, Au
21/21 Archaean, Proterozoic Orogenic and Vein, quartz, Au
Palaeozoic (slate-belt) Au
Although all characters contribute to division, characteristics of a particular group are not
necessarily those that distinguish groups. An example is that ‘massive sulphide’ and ‘sphalerite’
are characteristic of both SHMS and VHMS deposits but the main distinguishing characters might
be ‘FW stringer zone’ and ‘arsenic’. Group characters are those which describe attributes of the
group - those which score highly whether or not they separate this from their groups.
Distinguishing characters are those that, either by presence or absence, separate one group from
others.
Major groups include most classical styles (eg. VHMS, epithermal Au-Ag, porphyry Cu-Au) with
reasonable divisions and sub-groups, eg. Carbonate-hosted deposits are split between high-T
replacement deposits and another group with “Irish” and “MVT”. There are also many differences;
IOCG is not a simple coherent group but several Fe-rich groups; skarns separated into Pb-Zn-Ag-
W and Fe-Cu-Au.

112
predictive mineral discovery CRC Conference Barossa Valley 1-3 June 2004

Metamorphic grade is an important criteria as it is reflected in many characters (mineralogy).

Metamorphic hosted Pb-Zn (group 7) have subgroups of probable VHMS affinity and BHT;
metamorphic Cu-Fe-Au deposits form a separate group (13).
Archaean gold deposits are considered in more detail as an example of systematic analysis.
Archaean Gold Deposits in a Global Context
In a global context, there is considerable variation within Archaean Au deposits. In the global
analysis, there are three large groups dominated by Archaean Au deposits;
• mainly Archaean Au deposits in ironstone hosts is a mixture of Archaean and Proterozoic
hosts with iron from various pre-ore sources;
• archetypal "Archaean orogenic Au" in greenstone belts;
• mix of Archaean, Proterozoic and Palaeozoic orogenic Au mainly in sediments.
The differences are complex and not just in host rock, metamorphic grade (with associated
mineralogy) or commodity.
Archaean gold deposits also occur within three other groups:
• Siscoe C and Centurion Binduli sit comfortably among a group of epithermal to
mesothermal gold deposits of the Pacific rim (group 8)
• Group 13 consists of Au deposits in very high metamorphic grade rocks (Big Bell,
Challenger) along with deposits described as metamorphosed VHMS (Aitik, Mt Gibson, Werner
Lake).
• Group 14 consists of Boddington, Boliden, Bousquet and Campbell, show possible granitic
affinities with common characters of tourmaline and at least partly hosted by
granite/porphyry, pipe-like, amphibole, biotite, tourmaline, Bi, Sb, Te.

Acupan, Phillipine)__________________
Siscoe C, Canada )_________________|___
Centurion Binduli )_________________ |
Mineral Hill, NSW )________________|___|_____
Comstock, Nevada )________________ |
Jacinto, Cuba )_____________ | |
Waihi, NZ )____________|__|___ |
Golden Cross, NZ )__________________| |
Gunung Pongor, Ind)_________________||_ |
De Lamar, Idaho )__________________ | |
Hishikari Japan )_________________|_|_____|__
Santo Nino, Mexico)___________________________|_
Golden Plateau Qld)___________________ |
Pajingo, Qld )__________________|__ |
Misima, New Guinea)____________________|__ |
Lebong Tandou, Ind)______________________|_____|_____
Beregovo, Ukraine )_________________________ |
Emperor, Fiji )________________________|________|___
El Indio, Chile )______________________ |
Goldfield, Nevada )_____________________| |
Rodalquilar, Spain)____________________||_______ |
Nansatsu, Japan )________________________ | |
Quiruvilca, Peru )_______________________|____|___ |
Nevados del Famati)_________________________ | |
Pueblo Viejo, Cuba)________________________|______|___ |
Lihir, New Guinea )__________________________________|_|______________

Fig. 1. Part of the global dendrogram showing epithermal to mesothermal gold deposits (group 8). Archaean deposits
Siscoe C and Centurion Binduli (WA) occur in this group. The horizontal axis represents similarity of characters,
increasing to the left.

Considering the Archaean deposits in this phenetic analysis and global context, the variation
amongst these deposits and interspersal within other coherent groups implies a wide variation in
deposit style. Examples of epithermal, volcanic-associated and intrusive-associated styles are

113
predictive mineral discovery CRC Conference Barossa Valley 1-3 June 2004

present as well as typical "orogenic Au" with possible variations such as ironstone-hosted and
sediment-hosted types. The strong similarities of particular deposits with epithermal and VHMS
groups imply different processes (genetics) had influence. Archaean Au deposits appear to be
complex and exploration models should reflect the complexity and variation.

Reference
Belbin, L., 1995. PATN Technical Reference. CSIRO (unpublished).

114