Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T09:35:57.980Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The granite porphyry hidden in the Shuangjianzishan deposit, southern Great Xing’an Range, NE China: geochronology, isotope geochemistry and tectonic implications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 October 2020

Wei Wei Open the ORCID record for Wei Wei [Opens in a new window] ,
Xin-Biao Lv  and
Xiang-Dong Wang
Wei Wei*
Affiliation:
Institute of Geological Survey, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan430074, China
Xin-Biao Lv*
Affiliation:
Institute of Geological Survey, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan430074, China
Xiang-Dong Wang
Affiliation:
Wuhan Center of Geological Survey (CGS), Wuhan430205, China
*
Author for correspondence: Wei Wei, Emails: wwei@cug.edu.cn; luxb@cug.edu.cn
Author for correspondence: Wei Wei, Emails: wwei@cug.edu.cn; luxb@cug.edu.cn
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Shuangjianzishan vein-type Ag-Pb-Zn deposit in the southern Great Xing’an Range (GXR), NE China, is hosted in the slate of the Lower Permian Dashizhai Formation intruded by granite porphyry. In this paper, U–Pb zircon ages and bulk-rock and isotope (Sr, Nd, Pb and Hf) compositions are reported to investigate the derivation, evolution and geodynamic setting of this granite porphyry. It is closely associated with Pb-Zn-Ag mineralization in the southern GXR and contains important geological information relating to regional tectonic evolution. Laser ablation – inductively coupled plasma – mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) zircon U–Pb dating yields an emplacement age of 131 ± 1 Ma for the granite porphyry. Bulk-rock analyses show that the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry is characterized by high Si, Na and K contents but low Mg and Fe contents, and that the enrichment of Zr, Y and Ga suggests an A-type granite affinity. Most of the studied samples have relatively low 87Sr/86Sr values (0.70549–0.70558), with positive ϵNd(t) (0.71–0.88) and ϵHf(t) (4.9–6.9) values. The Sr–Nd isotope modelling results, in combination with the young TDM2 ages of Nd and Hf (850–864 and 668–778 Ma, respectively), reveal that the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry may be derived from the melting of mantle-derived juvenile component, with minor lower crustal components; this finding is also supported by Pb isotopic compositions. Considering the widespread presence of granitoids with coeval volcanic rocks and regional geology data, we propose that the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry formed in a post-orogenic extensional environment related to the upwelling of asthenospheric mantle following the closure of the Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean.

Keywords

granite porphyrychronologyGreat Xing’an RangeShuangjianzishanNE China
Type
Original Article
Information
Geological Magazine , Volume 158 , Issue 6 , June 2021 , pp. 995 - 1009
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

1. Introduction

NE China is located in the eastern section of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt (CAOB) (Fig. 1a) and has been jointly influenced by the Palaeo-Asian Ocean, Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean and Palaeo-Pacific tectonic–metallogenic domains (Ouyang et al. Reference Ouyang, Mao, Santosh, Wu, Hou and Wang2014; Zeng et al. Reference Zeng, Qin, Liu, Li, Zhai, Chu and Guo2015; Tang et al. Reference Tang, Xu, Wang, Zhao and Wang2016; Chen et al. Reference Chen, Xia, Ingrin, Deloule and Bi2017; Liu et al. Reference Liu2017). The Palaeo-Asian Ocean was located between the Siberian Craton and the North China Craton (NCC), and the final closure of the Palaeo-Asian Ocean is marked by suturing between the Songliao Block and the Liaoyuan Terrane (Fig. 1b). The closure of the Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean occurred to the NW (current position, F7 in Fig. 1b), and subduction of the Palaeo-Pacific oceanic plate to the east (current position) (Ouyang et al. Reference Ouyang, Mao, Zhou and Su2015). The distribution of granite in the Great Xing’an Range (GXR), an important part of NE China, is mainly controlled by the different tectonic activities that occurred in different periods. The post-orogenic extension during the Triassic Period followed the closure of the Palaeo-Asian Ocean (Liu et al. Reference Liu, Bagas and Wang2016). The northern Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean between the Siberian Craton and NE China closed during Middle–Late Jurassic time (Kravchinsky et al. Reference Kravchinsky, Cogné, Harbert and Kuzmin2002; Cogné et al. Reference Cogné, Kravchinsky, Halim and Hankard2005), and mass subduction of the southeastern Palaeo-Pacific Plate beneath NE China started during the Early Cretaceous Epoch (Zorin, Reference Zorin1999; Wu et al. Reference Wu, Yang, Lo, Wilde, Sun and Jahn2007; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Xu, Lv, Wei, Mei, Fan and Sun2018). Accordingly, it has been reported by previous researchers that the southern GXR is characterized by widespread Jurassic–Cretaceous (Yanshanian) granites and a small amount of Hercynian granitoids (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Jahn, Wilde and Sun2000, Reference Wu, Lin, Wilde, Zhang and Yang2005a; Sui et al. Reference Sui, Ge, Wu, Zhang, Xu and Chang2007; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Gao, Ge, Wu, Yang, Wilde and Li2010), bounded by the Hegenshan–Heihe Suture to the north, the Xilamulun–Changchun Suture to the south and the Nenjiang Fault to the east (Fig. 1b, c). These immense volumes of granitic rocks have mostly been considered A-type granites (Li & Yu, Reference Li and Yu1993; Sun et al. Reference Sun, Wu, Li and Lin2000; Jahn et al. Reference Jahn, Wu, Capdeviala, Fourcade, Wang and Zhao2001; Wu et al. Reference Wu, Sun, Li, Jahn and Wilde2002; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Parrish, Zhang, Xu, Yuan, Gao and Crowley2007; Yang et al. Reference Yang, Niu, Shan, Sun, Zhang, Li, Jiang and Yu2013). In addition, geochronological and isotopic studies in the southern GXR (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Xu, Lv, Wei, Mei, Fan and Sun2018) have shown that many contemporaneous and A-type granite-related hydrothermal vein-type ore deposits are comparable with those of the adjacent skarn deposits (e.g. the Shuangjianzishan vein-type Ag-Pb-Zn deposit and Haobugao skarn Fe-Zn deposit) and that the magmatism and associated mineralization were coevally generated during the Early Cretaceous Epoch (Zhai et al. Reference Zhai, Liu, Zhang, Yao, Wang and Yang2014; Mei et al. Reference Mei, Lv, Cao, Liu, Zhao, Ai, Tang and Munir2014, Reference Mei, Lv, Liu, Tang, Ai, Wang and Cisse2015; Ruan et al. Reference Ruan, Lv, Yang, Liu, Yu, Wu and Munir2015). The origin of these A-type granites therefore has important geological significance and economic potential because of the close association of A-type granites with skarn and epithermal deposits in the southern GXR (Ouyang et al. Reference Ouyang, Mao and Santosh2013, Reference Ouyang, Mao, Santosh, Wu, Hou and Wang2014; Zhai et al. Reference Zhai, Liu, Zhang, Yao, Wang and Yang2014; Mei et al. Reference Mei, Lv, Liu, Tang, Ai, Wang and Cisse2015; Ruan et al. Reference Ruan, Lv, Yang, Liu, Yu, Wu and Munir2015).

Fig. 1. (a) Location of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt (after Liu et al. Reference Liu, Bagas and Wang2016). (b) Tectonic sketch of NE China (after Wu et al. Reference Wu, Sun, Ge, Zhang, Grant, Wilde and Jahn2011). (c) Regional geological map of the southern Great Xing’an Range (GXR) (after Mei et al. Reference Mei, Lv, Cao, Liu, Zhao, Ai, Tang and Munir2014).

The super-large Shuangjianzishan Pb-Zn-Ag deposit, located in southwestern Ganzhuermiao between the Baiyinnuoer and Haobugao deposits (Fig. 1c), is reported to be a typical epithermal vein-type deposit associated with hidden granite porphyry (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Liu, Zeng, Sun and Liu2013; Liu et al. Reference Liu, Bagas and Wang2016; Gu et al. Reference Gu, Chen, Jia and Ju2017). However, whether the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry is an A-type granite, and the geodynamic setting and genetic mechanism of this granite, remains ambiguous. Two main possible models are at the centre of this controversy: (1) delamination of the lower crust and lithospheric mantle induced by the subduction of the Palaeo-Pacific Plate (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Yang, Wilde and Zhang2005b; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhou, Zhang, Ying, Zhang, Wu and Zhu2006a; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Ge, Wu, Wilde, Yang and Liu2008; Tian et al. Reference Tian, Ge, Yang, Zhao and Zhang2014; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Pei, Xu, Cao, Wang and Zhang2016b); and (2) post-orogenic lithospheric extension related to the closure of the Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean (Fan et al. Reference Fan, Guo, Wang and Lin2003; Meng, Reference Meng2003; Ying et al. Reference Ying, Zhou, Zhang and Wang2010; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Xu, Lv, Wei, Mei, Fan and Sun2018). We consider that it may be feasible to determine which of the two possible models is more likely by investigating the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry. In this paper, the formation time, evolution and geodynamic significance of Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry (depth greater than 1000 m) and its high affinity with A-type granite are defined by presenting its zircon U–Pb ages and Sr, Nd, Pb and Hf isotopes and whole-rock geochemical data.

2. Geological setting

NE China consists of the Erguna, Xing’an, Songliao, Jiamusi and Nadanhada massifs (Fig. 1b; Fritzell et al. Reference Fritzell, Bull and Shephard2016; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Chen, Chen, Wolfgang and Muharrem2006b, 2016b). The Erguna Block is of Neoproterozoic age, and Jurassic basalts are widely distributed as dykes (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Sun, Zhao, Li, Zhao, Pang and Li2005c). The oldest basement in the Xing’an Block comprises Palaeozoic amphibolite- to greenschist-facies metamorphic rocks (Miao et al. Reference Miao, Liu, Zhang, Fan, Shi and Xie2007). The underlying basement of the Songliao Basin is composed of Palaeoproterozoic meta-gabbro and meta-granite (Pei et al. Reference Pei, Xu, Yang, Zhao, Liu and Hu2007). The Jiamusi Block contains the Proterozoic Mashan complex and the Early–Late Palaeozoic granitoids (Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Gao, Ge, Wu, Yang, Wilde and Li2010). The Nadanhada Terrane comprises the Raohe complex (a Late Palaeozoic – Jurassic volcano-sedimentary sequence) and undeformed Mesozoic granitoids (Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Gao, Ge, Wu, Yang, Wilde and Li2010; Wu et al. Reference Wu, Sun, Ge, Zhang, Grant, Wilde and Jahn2011). All of these massifs were separated by a series of NE-trending faults (Fig. 1b).

As an important component of NE China, the southern Great Xing’an Range is bounded by the Nenjiang, Hegenshan–Heihe and Xilamulun–Changchun sutures (Fig. 1c). The Palaeo-Asian Ocean, Palaeo-Pacific and Mongol–Okhotsk subductions (Kelty et al. Reference Kelty, Yin, Dash, Gehrels and Ribeiro2008; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Xu, Pei, Wang, Li and Cao2015; Tang et al. Reference Tang, Xu, Wang, Zhao and Wang2016; Chen et al. Reference Chen, Xia, Ingrin, Deloule and Bi2017; Liu et al. Reference Liu, Zhang, Wilde, Zhou, Wang, Ge, Wang and Ling2017) have jointly developed a suite of NE-trending and E–W-trending large-scale faults, which strongly controlled the regional stratigraphic sequence, magmatism and polymetallic mineralization in this region (Fig. 1c). A widespread Permian succession of sedimentary and volcanic rocks makes up much of the GXR, and also the significant ore-bearing strata regionally. Intense magmatic activities produced widespread NE-trending granite bodies, mainly the Yanshanian granitoids, in the southern GXR (Fig. 1c). Wu et al. (Reference Wu, Jahn, Wilde, Lo, Yui, Lin, Ge and Sun2003) showed that Mesozoic volcanic rocks and granites in the southern GXR have low initial 87Sr/86Sr ratios (0.7045 ± 0.0015), positive ϵNd(t) values (+1.3 to +2.8) and young Sm–Nd model ages (720–840 Ma). Liu et al. (Reference Liu, Jiang, Leon, Chen, Han and Wan2020) reported that the Wulanba granite in the southern GXR originated from partial melting of juvenile crust derived from the depleted mantle with a minor input of old crust. However, Tang et al. (Reference Tang, Sun and Mao2020) suggested that upper Mesozoic volcanic rocks of the GXR were derived from the partial melting of a mantle wedge that was modified by previously subducted slab-derived fluids, and that the magma was likely introduced with limited crustal contamination. Ouyang et al. (Reference Ouyang, Mao, Zhou and Su2015) identified three magmatic stages of the Mesozoic granitoids that occurred during 255–220 Ma, 184–160 Ma and 155–120 Ma. The intrusive activities peaked during late Mesozoic time (155–120 Ma) and were accompanied by large-scale mineralization. For example, the mineralized Huanggang granite has an age of 135–137 Ma (Mei et al. Reference Mei, Lv, Cao, Liu, Zhao, Ai, Tang and Munir2014; Zhai et al. Reference Zhai, Liu, Zhang, Yao, Wang and Yang2014), the mineralized Baiyinnuoer granite has an age of 135–139 Ma (Jiang et al. Reference Jiang, Nie, Bai, Liu and Liu2011; Shu et al. Reference Shu, Lai, Sun, Wang and Meng2013), the mineralized Haobugao granite has an age of 138–139 Ma (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Xu, Lv, Wei, Mei, Fan and Sun2018) and the mineralized Weilasituo granite has an age of 133–136 Ma (Pan et al. Reference Pan, Guo, Wang, Xue, Hou, Tong and Li2009; Zhai et al. Reference Zhai, Liu, Li, Zhang, Li, Fu, Jiang, Ma and Qi2016). The magmatic and mineralizing activity at Shuangjianzishan has been dated at 133–136 Ma (Zhai et al. Reference Zhai, Anthony, Liu, David, Panagiotis, Stylianos, Li, Li and Sun2020). Several studies of the Shuangjianzishan deposit have addressed the ore deposit geology (Kuang et al. Reference Kuang, Zheng, Lu, Liu, Zhang, Li and Cheng2014), mineralogy (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Liu, Zeng, Liu, Sun, Yin and Yin2014), whole-rock geochemistry (Liu et al. Reference Liu, Bagas and Wang2016; Gu et al. Reference Gu, Chen, Jia and Ju2017), magmatic rock and ore geochronology (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Liu, Zeng, Sun and Liu2013; Liu et al. Reference Liu, Bagas and Wang2016; Ouyang et al. Reference Ouyang, Li and Zhou2016; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Sun, Pei, Liu, Liu and Jiang2016a; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Xu, Lv, Wei, Mei, Fan and Sun2018; Zhang, Reference Zhang2018; Zhai et al. Reference Zhai, Anthony, Liu, David, Panagiotis, Stylianos, Li, Li and Sun2020) and S–Pb isotope geochemistry (Jiang et al. Reference Jiang, Zhu, Huang, Xu and Zhang2017; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Xu, Lv, Wei, Mei, Fan and Sun2018). However, questions related to the petrogenesis and the tectonic setting of the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry remain unresolved. For example, Liu et al. (Reference Liu, Bagas and Wang2016) suggested that the porphyritic granodiorite is interpreted as being adakitic and related to the subduction of the Palaeo-Pacific oceanic plate, whereas Gu et al. (Reference Gu, Chen, Jia and Ju2017) proposed that granite porphyry formed in a post-orogenic extensional environment related to the upwelling of asthenospheric mantle due to the deep break of the subducting plate of Mongolia–Okhotsk.

The Shuangjianzishan Pb-Zn-Ag deposit is located in the central part of the Songliao Block (Fig. 1c), which mainly consists of the Upper Jurassic Manketouebo Formation, the Middle Jurassic Xinmin Formation, the Lower Permian Dashizhai Formation and the Quaternary Holocene Formation (Fig. 2b). The Dashizhai Formation comprises tuffaceous and silty slate, and the southeastern Xinmin Formation consists of a suite of volcaniclastic rocks. The northwestern Manketouebo Formation is composed of pyroclastic rocks, felsic lava and andesite. The zircon U–Pb ages of the Manketouebo Formation volcanic rocks are 150–160 Ma (Yang et al. Reference Yang, Gao, Chen, Zhou, Zhang, Jin and Zhang2012). Quaternary sediments, located in the valleys, mainly consist of proluvial and alluvial materials. A large amount of Yanshanian granites are distributed in the northwestern periphery of the mining area (Fig. 2a). An unexposed granite porphyry was discovered by drilling exploration (ZK12-37 in Zhai et al. Reference Zhai, Anthony, Liu, David, Panagiotis, Stylianos, Li, Li and Sun2020; ZK12-50 in Gu et al. Reference Gu, Chen, Jia and Ju2017). Since the discovery of the Shuangjianzishan deposit, several studies on the geochronology have been completed (Table 1). There are three magmatic periods described by the Shuangjianzishan deposit (254–239 Ma, 169–159 Ma and 135–128 Ma) and there is no final consensus on the age of the granite porphyry. For example, Ouyang et al. (Reference Ouyang, Li and Zhou2016) consider that U–Pb zircon ages of the granite porphyry are 159 ± 2 Ma. However, most studies suggested that the age of granite porphyry is c. 130 Ma (Liu et al. Reference Liu, Bagas and Wang2016; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Sun, Pei, Liu, Liu and Jiang2016a; Gu et al. Reference Gu, Chen, Jia and Ju2017; Zhai et al. Reference Zhai, Anthony, Liu, David, Panagiotis, Stylianos, Li, Li and Sun2020).

Fig. 2. (a) Geological map of the Shuangjianzishan Pb-Zn-Ag deposit (after Liu et al. Reference Liu, Bagas and Wang2016). (b) Large-scale geological map of the Shuangjianzishan mining area.

Table 1. Ages of magmatism in Shuangjianzishan deposit, all determined by zircon U–Pb dating

3. Core and sample descriptions

Zhai et al. (Reference Zhai, Anthony, Liu, David, Panagiotis, Stylianos, Li, Li and Sun2020) subdivided the granite porphyry into lower coarse-grained facies and upper fine-grained facies, and Gu et al. (Reference Gu, Chen, Jia and Ju2017) described the mineral composition of the granite hand specimens. According to our observations, the granite porphyry was found in the core of drill hole ZK12-50 from a depth of 1011 m to the bottom at 1023 m, and presents uniform coarse-grained facies without facies change at depth. The granite porphyry is in intrusive contact with the Lower Permian Dashizhai Formation and the contact is an intrusive breccia, with xenoliths of Permian slate within the granite. The main alteration in the granite near the contact zone is pyritization (at 1011 m), and the overlying slates have undergone strong chloritic and silicic alteration (from 967 to 952 m) and contain numerous Pb–Zn veins (Fig. 3). From the granite porphyry to the country rock, the alteration varies from pyritization, chloritic to silicic alteration. Under the influence of the magmatic–hydrothermal activity, abundant breccias cemented by minor quartz-calcite occur in the Permian slate, and the ore bodies are lenticular ore-bearing veinlets (Fig. 3). The number of samples is limited as the core column was badly damaged. Nine rock samples from ZK12-50, collected from 1011–1023 m depths at an interval of about 1 m, were analysed for their zircon U–Pb dates and whole-rock and isotope compositions (Table 2). The granite porphyry is red and has a porphyritic texture (Fig. 4a). The phenocrysts are euhedral plagioclase (15–20 vol%), subhedral K-feldspar (10–15 vol%) and subhedral quartz (20–25 vol%) (Fig. 4b, d, e). The dark minerals observed in hand specimens are mainly flake biotite (> 10 vol%). The matrix (30–35 vol%) consists of quartz, plagioclase and K-feldspar with minor hornblende and accessory minerals (< 2 vol%) including rutile, pyrite, zircon and apatite (Fig. 4f). The plagioclase is partially altered to sericite, and the biotite is partially altered to chlorite (Fig. 4c).

Fig. 3. Simplified drill columnar section and photographs of intrusive contact relation.

Table 2. Sample collection in Shuangjianzishan deposit, all coarse-grained granite

Fig. 4. Hand-specimen photograph, photomicrographs and back-scatter electron image for the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry: (a) porphyritic texture; (b) quartz phenocryst and matrix quartz; (c) sericite and chlorite alteration; (d) plagioplase phenocryst; (e) K-feldspar phenocryst; and (f) biotite and accessory minerals. Pl – plagioclase; Bi – biotite; Qtz – quartz; Kfs – K-feldspar; Ser – sericite; Ab – albite; Chl – chlorite; Hb – hornblende; Ap – apatite; Zrn – zircon; Py – pyrite; Rt – rutile.

4. Analytical methods

4.a. Zircon U–Pb dating

A total of 21 zircon grains in three samples from drill hole ZK12-50 (depth, 1020 m) were separated using conventional heavy liquid and magnetic techniques and mounted in epoxy blocks. These blocks were then polished to obtain an even surface before analysis by laser ablation – inductively coupled plasma – mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS). All the zircons were documented via transmitted and reflected light micrographs and cathodoluminescence (CL) images to reveal their internal structures. These procedures were performed at the State Key Laboratory of Geological Processes and Mineral Resources (GPMR), China University of Geosciences (Wuhan). Zircon U-Th-Pb measurements were carried out under a 32-μm diameter laser beam at the GPMR, and a Geo Las 2005 System was used. An Agilent 7700a ICP-MS instrument was employed to acquire ion-signal intensities with a 193-nm Ar-F excimer laser and a homogenizing, imaging optical system (Micro Las, Göttingen, Germany). A detailed description of the instrumentation and analytical accuracy can be found in Liu et al. (Reference Liu, Hu, Gao, Gunther, Xu, Gao and Chen2008, Reference Liu, Gao, Hu, Gao, Zong and Wang2010). Concordia diagrams were generated and weighted mean calculations were performed using Isoplot/Ex_ver3 (Ludwig, Reference Ludwig2003).

4.b. Whole-rock geochemical analyses

Because the rock lithology is relatively uniform without obvious dark enclaves, the sample set is enough when combined with previous studies of the congenetic granites. Three whole-rock samples were crushed and powdered in an agate mill to c. 200 mesh. Major-element analyses were carried out at ALS Chemex (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. by spectrofluorimetry with relative analytical errors of < 5%. The samples created for trace-element analyses were from the same set as for major-element analysis, and digested by HF+HNO3 in Teflon bombs and analysed with an Agilent 7500a ICP-MS at the GPMR. The detailed sample-digesting procedure for ICP-MS analyses and the analytical precision and accuracy of the trace-element analyses are as described by Liu et al. (Reference Liu, Hu, Gao, Gunther, Xu, Gao and Chen2008).

4.c. Sr-Nd-Pb and Hf isotopic analyses

Three isotope samples were crushed and powdered in an agate mill to c. 200 mesh. Sr and Nd isotopic analyses were carried out via a Micromass Isoprobe multicollector (MC) ICP-MS at the Guangzhou Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences (GIGCAS); the analytical procedures regarding the Sr and Nd isotopes are described in detail by Wei et al. (Reference Wei, Liang, Li and Liu2002) and Li et al. (Reference Li, Liu, Sun, Li, Liang and Liu2004). The chemical separation of Sr and Nd was performed via a method similar to the methods described by Li & McCulloch (Reference Li, McCulloch, Flower, Chung, Lo and Lee1998) and Xu et al. (Reference Xu, Castillo, Li, Yu, Zhang and Han2002). Sample powders (50–100 mg) were digested with distilled HF-HNO3 in screw-top PFA beakers at 120°C for 15 days. Sr and rare earth elements (REEs) were then separated using cation columns, followed by the separation of Nd from the REE fraction using di-2-ethylhexyl phosphoric acid (HDEHP) columns. The 87Sr/86Sr value of the NBS987 standard and 143Nd/144Nd value of the JNdi-1 standard were 0.710288 ± 28 (2σ) and 0.512109 ± 12 (2σ), respectively; all the measured 143Nd/144Nd and 87Sr/86Sr values were corrected to 143Nd/144Nd = 0.7219 and 87Sr/86Sr = 0.1194, respectively. Pb isotopic compositions were measured by thermal ionization mass spectrometry (TIMS) using a procedure similar to that described by Xu & Castillo (Reference Xu and Castillo2004). Pb isotopic ratios were corrected for fractionation using replicate analyses of the standard NBS 981. In situ Hf isotopic analyses on the same set of zircons were conducted using a Neptune Plus MC-ICP-MS equipped with a Geolas-2005 193-nm Ar-F excimer laser, also at the GPMR. A laser repetition rate of 10 Hz at 100 mJ was used with a spot size of 44 μm. Details of the analytical technique are described by Hu et al. (Reference Hu, Liu, Gao, Liu, Zhang, Tong, Lin, Zong, Li, Chen, Zhou and Yang2012).

5. Results

5.a. Zircon U–Pb geochronology

The CL images of selected zircons are shown in Figure 5. The LA-ICP-MS zircon U–Pb analytical data are summarized in Table 3 and illustrated in the concordia diagram (Fig. 6). The zircon grains from the granite are grey, prismatic and euhedral with oscillatory zoning, showing typical magmatic zircons. Most of these grains have high Th/U ratios ranging from 0.34 to 2.10 (Table 4), which supports their magmatic origin (Pupin, Reference Pupin1980; Koschek, Reference Koschek1993). A total of 23 analyses from 21 grains yielded concordant results with a weighted mean 206Pb/238U age of 131 ± 1 Ma (mean square weighted deviation (MSWD) = 0.46, n = 23) (Fig. 6), which is interpreted as the crystallization age of the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry.

Fig. 5. Representative cathodoluminescence (CL) images of zircons from the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry. Numbers and ages on zircon grains are the analysed spots in Table 3.

Table 3. LA-ICP-MS zircon U–Pb Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry data

Fig. 6. Zircon U–Pb concordia diagrams for the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry. The concordia age, mean age and mean square weighted deviation (MSWD) are shown in each figure.

Table 4. Major- (wt%) and trace-element (ppm) contents of the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry

5.b. Major- and trace-element geochemistry

The major- and trace-element abundances of three samples are provided in Table 4. All the samples have relatively high concentrations of SiO2 (69.63–70.32 wt%), Na2O (4.37–4.38 wt%) and K2O (3.92–4.29 wt%), with K2O/Na2O ratios of 0.90–0.98, indicating their high-K calc-alkaline composition (Fig. 7a; Peccerillo & Taylor, Reference Peccerillo and Taylor1976). The granite porphyry is metaluminous and weakly peraluminous with A/CNK (molar ratio of Al2O3/(CaO + Na2O + K2O)) and A/NK ratios ranging over 0.98–1.01 and 1.21–1.24, respectively (Fig. 7b; Maniar & Piccoli, Reference Maniar and Piccoli1989).

Fig. 7. (a) SiO2–K2O discriminant plot (after Peccerillo & Taylor, Reference Peccerillo and Taylor1976) for the Shuangjianzishan (SJZS) granite porphyry; (b) A/CNK–A/NK diagram (after Maniar & Piccoli, Reference Maniar and Piccoli1989) for the discriminant of metaluminous, peraluminous and peralkaline rocks; (c) chondrite-normalized REE pattern; and (d) primitive-mantle-normalized trace-element patterns. Primitive mantle and chondrite data are from Sun & McDonough (Reference Sun, McDonough, Saunders and Morry1989). Haobugao data are from Wang et al. (Reference Wang, Xu, Lv, Wei, Mei, Fan and Sun2018), the data represented by the square are from the SJZS granite (Gu et al. Reference Gu, Chen, Jia and Ju2017) and Yanshanian granites data describing the southern GXR are from Mei et al. (Reference Mei, Lv, Cao, Liu, Zhao, Ai, Tang and Munir2014), Ruan et al. (Reference Ruan, Lv, Yang, Liu, Yu, Wu and Munir2015), Wang et al. (Reference Wang, Sun, Pei, Liu, Liu and Jiang2016a) and Liu et al. (Reference Liu, Zhang, Wilde, Zhou, Wang, Ge, Wang and Ling2017).

The granite porphyry exhibits moderate REE contents ranging from 151.61 to 156.41 ppm, is enriched in light REEs (LREEs) and depleted in heavy REE (HREEs), has (La/Yb)N ratios of 3.16–8.93 and has significant negative Eu anomalies (Eu/Eu* = 0.37–0.40) (Table 4). These samples are rich in large-ion lithophile elements (LILE), but depleted in high-field-strength elements (HFSE), displaying strong negative anomalies of Ba, Sr, P and Ti (Fig. 7c, d). These features imply the occurrence of apatite and ilmenite fractional crystallization or the presence of residual apatite and ilmenite minerals in the magma source, and the high Rb concentrations (208–220 ppm) suggest that the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry may have undergone high crystal fractionation (Fig. 7d).

5.c. Sr-Nd-Pb isotopes

Three samples were analysed for Sr-Nd-Pb isotopic compositions, and the results are presented in Tables 5 and 6. The Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry samples show low (87Sr/86Sr)t values of 0.7055–0.7056 and positive ϵNd(t) values of 0.71–0.88 (Table 5). The two-stage Nd model ages (T DM2) of the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry are 850–864 Ma. Meanwhile, the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry samples are characterized by high radiogenic Pb isotope ratios with (206Pb/204Pb)t = 18.12–18.25, (207Pb/204Pb)t = 15.52–15.53 and (208Pb/204Pb)t = 38.00–38.11 (Table 6).

Table 5. Sr–Nd isotopic compositions of the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry

*Note: initial Sr and Nd isotopic ratios are calculated based on t = 131 Ma.

Table 6. Pb isotopic compositions of the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry

*Note: (206Pb/204Pb)t , (207Pb/204Pb)t and (208Pb/204Pb)t are Pb isotopic ratios at t = 131 Ma for the whole-rock of the Shuangjianzishan granite samples, calculated from the measured whole-rock U, Th and Pb contents and whole-rock Pb isotopic ratios.

5.d. Zircon Hf isotopic composition

The in situ Hf isotopic analysis results of the zircons from the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry are listed in Table 7. A total of 15 spots of zircon grains obtained from sample ZK12-50 were measured, giving initial 176Hf/177Hf ratios ranging from 0.282833 to 0.282888 with corresponding ϵHf(t) values of 4.9–6.9. The fLu/Hf values range over −0.98 to −0.96, which are much lower than the fLu/Hf values of oceanic crust and continental upper crust (−0.34 and −0.72, respectively) (Amelin et al. Reference Amelin, Lee and Halliday2000). The two-stage model ages (T DM2) vary from 668 to 778 Ma (Table 7).

Table 7. Zircon Lu–Hf isotopic data of the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry

*Note: All spots are calculated based on t = 131 Ma for the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry.

6. Discussion

6.a. Late Jurassic – Early Cretaceous granitic magmatism

The results of the zircon LA-ICP-MS U–Pb dating at Shuangjianzishan yield a diagenetic age of 131 ± 1 Ma for the granite porphyry, consistent with the age of 131–135 Ma presented in previous reports (Table 1). Wu et al. (Reference Wu, Liu, Zeng, Sun and Liu2013) reported a sphalerite Rb–Sr isochron age of 133 ± 4 Ma, and Zhai et al. (Reference Zhai, Anthony, Liu, David, Panagiotis, Stylianos, Li, Li and Sun2020) dated a molybdenite Re–Os age of 134.9 ± 3.4 Ma. The magmatic events that occurred slightly before 130 Ma are therefore coeval with the Pb-Zn-Ag mineralization. In addition, this paper does not contradict the views of Liu et al. (Reference Liu, Bagas and Wang2016), Ouyang et al. (Reference Ouyang, Li and Zhou2016) or Wang et al. (Reference Wang, Sun, Pei, Liu, Liu and Jiang2016a) on the possibility of superimposed mineralization via two periods of mineralization (at c. 165 Ma and c. 130 Ma). However, the major mineralization of the Shuangjianzishan deposit was triggered by the granite porphyry intrusion, which occurred over a short interval during the Early Cretaceous Epoch.

6.b. Petrogenesis and evolution of the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry

Granitoids have traditionally been classified as I-, S- and A-types based on chemical and mineralogical compositions (Chappell & White Reference Chappell and White1974, Reference Chappell and White1992; Hineab et al. Reference Hineab, Williams, Chappelle and White1978; Whalen et al. Reference Whalen, Currie and Chappell1987). As the emplacement ages of the regional Yanshanian granite and the adjacent Haobugao granite are mainly concentrated within Early Cretaceous time, plotting the chemical composition of these granites is useful for comparison of the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry with the pervasive Early Cretaceous magmatism. Samples from the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry are metaluminous to peraluminous (Fig. 7b) and plot within the high-K calc-alkaline series (Fig. 7a), consistent with the adjacent Haobugao granite and most of the Yanshanian granite. Chondrite-normalized REE patterns show that the samples are obviously enriched in LREEs, depleted in HREEs, and have strongly negative Eu anomalies (Fig. 7c). Compared with primitive mantle, the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry is enriched in Zr, Hf, Rb, Th and U and depleted in Ba, Sr, P and Ti (Fig. 7d), which is similar to typical A-type granite (Li et al. Reference Li, Guo, Li, Li and Zhao2014). S-type granites always contain more Al than that required to form feldspar, and the excess Al is hosted in Al-rich biotite, generally accompanied by more Al-rich minerals such as cordierite or muscovite (Chappell, Reference Chappell1984; Chappell et al. Reference Chappell, Bryant and Wyborn2012). However, the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry has a low biotite content (Fig. 4f). In addition, the measured A/CNK values are no less than 1.1 (Fig. 7b), indicating that the samples are A-type or I-type granites, not S-type granites (Chappell & White, Reference Chappell and White1992; Chappell, Reference Chappell1999).

A-type granites are widely distributed and closely associated with I-type granites in NE China. Due to the uncertainty and diversity of geological processes and the geochemical behaviour of elements, many researchers (Tian et al. Reference Tian, Ge, Yang, Zhao and Zhang2014) have found that it is difficult to distinguish the A- and I-types in the GXR based on only the discrimination diagrams. In addition, the A-type granites have the same Sr–Nd isotopic characteristics as the I-type granites, indicating that they are derived from the same source (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Sun, Li, Jahn and Wilde2002; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Xu, Lv, Wei, Mei, Fan and Sun2018). A-type granites are usually formed under conditions of high temperature and low pressure (Collins et al. Reference Collins, Beams, White and Chappell1982; Clemens et al. Reference Clemens, Holloway and White1986), and therefore generally contain relatively high-temperature anhydrous minerals, such as pyroxene, fayalite and interstitial biotite (Collins et al. Reference Collins, Beams, White and Chappell1982; Whalen et al. Reference Whalen, Currie and Chappell1987; Eby, Reference Eby1992) and are enriched in HFSEs such as Zr, Nb, Y, REE and Ga. Wu et al. (Reference Wu, Sun, Li, Jahn and Wilde2002) found that A-type granites in NE China usually contain alkali mafic minerals, such as sodic pyroxene, or contain annite and Fe-rich calcic amphibole. From microscopic observation, many biotite and hornblende grains were found in the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry (Fig. 4a, d). In the diagrams of K2O+Na2O, FeO*/MgO, Nb versus Ga/Al, all the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry and regional granite samples plot in the A-type field, suggesting that they are A-type granites (Fig. 8a–c). Moreover, in the Nb-Y-Ce diagram (Fig. 8d), all the granite samples plot in the A2 group, suggesting a post-collisional tectonic setting.

Fig. 8. Discrimination diagrams of (a) Nb versus 10 000×Ga/Al; (b) Na2O+K2O versus 10 000×Ga/Al; (c) FeO/MgO versus 10 000×Ga/Al; (d) Nb-Y-Ce (after Whalen et al. Reference Whalen, Currie and Chappell1987; Eby, Reference Eby1992). Triangle points are from Wang et al. (Reference Wang, Xu, Lv, Wei, Mei, Fan and Sun2018) and the square from Gu et al. (Reference Gu, Chen, Jia and Ju2017). A1 – anorogenic setting; A2 – post-collisional setting.

As mentioned, the most striking features of the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry are its low initial 87Sr/86Sr ratios, positive ϵNd(t) values, Nd T DM2 ages (850–864 Ma) and high zircons ϵHf(t) values (Tables 5 and 6), suggesting a high proportion of juvenile material in its petrogenesis. In order to provide a more generalized picture for the southern GXR, we further plotted additional published data describing the adjacent Haobugao deposit granite and regional Mesozoic granites for their Sr-Nd-Hf isotopic compositions. As shown in Figure 9a, all ϵHf(t) spot results from the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry, consistent with those of Haobugao, deviate from the ancient crustal evolution lines, suggesting that the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry was derived from the melting of mantle-derived juvenile component. The potential for an enriched mantle source could not be ruled out, as Wang et al. (Reference Wang, Chen, Chen, Wolfgang and Muharrem2006b) proposed that Mesozoic volcanic rocks in the Songliao Basin could be derived from an enriched mantle source. The zircons of the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry have similar Hf isotopic features as the Phanerozoic igneous rocks in the eastern CAOB (Fig. 9a; Wu & Sun, Reference Wu and Sun1999; Yang et al. Reference Yang, Wu, Shao, Wilde, Xie and Liu2006; Sui et al. Reference Sui, Ge, Wu, Zhang, Xu and Chang2007), distinct from those in the NCC (Fig. 9a; Yang et al. Reference Yang, Wu, Shao, Wilde, Xie and Liu2006). Based on the mixing model proposed by Wu et al. (Reference Wu, Jahn, Wilde and Sun2000, Reference Wu, Sun, Li, Jahn and Wilde2002), it is obvious that most samples from the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry plot close to the mixing lines of the mantle-derived juvenile components (c. 80%) and the lower crust (c. 20%), similar to those of regional Mesozoic A-type granites (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Jahn, Wilde, Lo, Yui, Lin, Ge and Sun2003); this finding is also supported by the Pb isotopic compositions (Fig. 9c, d). The calculation by no means indicates that the granites were formed by mixing depleted mantle (DM) and lower continental crust (LCC) melts in such proportions. Rather, it suggests that the granitic magmas were produced by melting of a mixed lithology containing lower crustal components intruded or underplated by mantle-derived magma in such a proportion (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Jahn, Wilde, Lo, Yui, Lin, Ge and Sun2003). Furthermore, mafic microgranular enclaves, which are significant evidence of magma mixing (Barbarin, Reference Barbarin2005), have not been observed in this granite porphyry. Typical mineralogical textures representing magma mixing, such as quartz ocelli rimmed by hornblende and/or biotite and acicular apatite (Baxter & Feely, Reference Baxter and Feely2002), have not been found either (Fig. 4a). Accordingly, the small amount of crustal components involved in the magma formation may be due to assimilation occurring in the magma chamber or during magma uprising. Some studies suggested that the generation of such voluminous granites should be related to the melting of heated crust induced from upwelling of the asthenosphere in the late stage of orogenesis or subduction (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Jahn, Wilde and Sun2000). We propose that, following oceanic closure, asthenospheric mantle melting during the Neoproterozoic Era led to mafic underplating in the lower crust, with which it interacted; these were subsequently melted to produce the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry.

Fig. 9. (a) Mantle: plot of ϵHf(t) versus t (Ma) for the zircons from the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry. CAOB – the Central Asian Orogenic Belt; YFTB – Yanshan Fold and Thrust Belt (Yang et al. Reference Yang, Wu, Shao, Wilde, Xie and Liu2006). (b) Orogene: ϵNd(t) versus (87Sr/86Sr)t isotopic ratio plot showing mixing proportions between two end-members (after Wu et al. Reference Wu, Jahn, Wilde, Lo, Yui, Lin, Ge and Sun2003): (1) depleted mantle or juvenile components (DM – upper mantle peridotite; B – basalt) and (2) crustal components (LCC – lower continental crust; UCC – upper continental crust; both represented by the Mashan gneisses in the Jiamusi Block; Wu et al. Reference Wu, Jahn, Wilde and Sun2000). The grey area represents Mesozoic granites from Wu et al. (Reference Wu, Jahn, Wilde, Lo, Yui, Lin, Ge and Sun2003). (c) Upper crust: 207Pb/204Pb versus 206Pb/204Pb diagram and (d) lower crust: 208Pb/204Pb versus 206Pb/204Pb diagram for distinguishing tectonic setting (after Zartman & Doe, Reference Zartman and Doe1981). Haobugao data Wang et al. (Reference Wang, Xu, Lv, Wei, Mei, Fan and Sun2018).

6.c. Tectonic implications

The peak of the outbreak of volcanic rocks and A-type granites in NE China occurred during the Cretaceous Period, which was also an important period for asthenospheric upwelling, lithospheric thinning and crustal stretching (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Sun, Li, Jahn and Wilde2002), as well as the peak of large-scale magma-thermal events in the Xingmeng Orogenic Belt (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Lin, Wilde, Zhang and Yang2005a; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhou, Zhang, Ying, Zhang, Wu and Zhu2006a; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Gao, Ge, Wu, Yang, Wilde and Li2010). In the southern GXR, a special geological structure was developed where the Palaeo-Asian and the Palaeo-Pacific tectonic domains overlap. The tectonic setting for the Shuangjianzishan deposit, the Haobugao deposit, and other deposits could be revealed by the presence of A-type granites associated with mineralization, which can form in both post-orogenic and anorogenic settings (Sylvester, Reference Sylvester1989; Bonin, Reference Bonin1990; Eby, Reference Eby1992; Nedelec et al. Reference Nedelec, Stephens and Fallick1995). Eby (Reference Eby1992) sub-divided A-type granites into A1 and A2 groups; the A1 group represents an anorogenic setting and the A2 group represents a variety of tectonic environments. The Shuangjianzishan granite samples, consistent with the Haobugao granite, mainly fall within the A2 group (Figs 8d, 10a, b), suggesting that they formed in a post-orogenic extensional environment.

Fig. 10. (a) (Rb/30)-Hf-3Ta discrimination diagram (after Harris et al. Reference Harris, Pearce, Tindle, Coward and Reis1986); (b) Rb versus (Yb+Ta) discrimination diagram (after Pearce, Reference Pearce1996). VAG – volcanic-arc granite; ORG – ocean-ridge granite; WPG – within-plate granite; COLG – collision granite; POG – post-collision granite. Triangle points are from Wang et al. (Reference Wang, Xu, Lv, Wei, Mei, Fan and Sun2018), the square from Gu et al. (Reference Gu, Chen, Jia and Ju2017) and the grey-shaded squares from Mei et al. (Reference Mei, Lv, Cao, Liu, Zhao, Ai, Tang and Munir2014), Ruan et al. (Reference Ruan, Lv, Yang, Liu, Yu, Wu and Munir2015), Wang et al. (Reference Wang, Sun, Pei, Liu, Liu and Jiang2016a) and Liu et al. (Reference Liu, Zhang, Wilde, Zhou, Wang, Ge, Wang and Ling2017).

As mentioned in Section 6.b, the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry was the result of extensive partial melting of mantle-derived juvenile crust, synchronous with the Early Cretaceous magmatism spanning the entire GXR, which is envisaged to have formed in a lithospheric extensional environment (Li et al. Reference Li, Zhao, Zhou, Vasconcelos, Ma, Deng, Souza, Zhao and Wu2008). In addition, widespread volcanic rocks (137 Ma) exposed around Shuangjianzishan are basically coeval with the Early Cretaceous granite porphyry (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Xu, Lv, Wei, Mei, Fan and Sun2018). It was recognized by previous researchers that the intrusive rocks formed in an extensional environment (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Xu, Lv, Wei, Mei, Fan and Sun2018). Furthermore, the generation of A-type granites requires a high melting temperature (Clemens et al. Reference Clemens, Holloway and White1986), and the upwelling of the asthenosphere could provide the heat necessary to produce a considerable volume of A-type granites in NE China during late Mesozoic time in this extensional setting (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Sun, Li, Jahn and Wilde2002).

To date, two possible models have been proposed for this extensional setting: (1) delamination of the lower crust induced by the subduction of the Palaeo-Pacific Plate (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Yang, Wilde and Zhang2005b; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhou, Zhang, Ying, Zhang, Wu and Zhu2006a; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Ge, Wu, Wilde, Yang and Liu2008, Reference Zhang, Gao, Ge, Wu, Yang, Wilde and Li2010); and (2) post-orogenic lithospheric extension related to the closure of the Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean (Fan et al. Reference Fan, Guo, Wang and Lin2003; Meng, Reference Meng2003). As previous studies have suggested, the Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean closed during the Middle and Late Jurassic epochs (Zorin, Reference Zorin1999), and the Pacific Plate has expanded considerably since the Late Cretaceous Epoch (Larson et al. Reference Larson, Pitman, Golovchenko, Cande, Dewey, Haxby and La Brecque1985), so the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry U–Pb age of 131 Ma coincides with post-orogenic extension following the closure of the Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean. Furthermore, Mesozoic volcanic magmatism in the southern GXR shows a NE-trending linear distribution that gradually ages from west to east (125–160 Ma) (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Chen, Chen, Wolfgang and Muharrem2006b), consistent with the Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean closing direction from west to east (Metelkin et al. Reference Metelkin, Vemikovsky and Kazansky2010). Gu et al. (Reference Gu, Chen, Jia and Ju2017) believe the regional tectonic stress in the southern GXR is tensional and that the Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean closing direction favours the reduction in pressure within the plate. However, the subduction of the Palaeo-Pacific Ocean Plate caused large-scale back-arc extension of NE China and is not dominant in this region (Dong et al. Reference Dong, Ge, Yang, Zhao, Wang, Zhang and Su2014; Ma et al. Reference Ma, Cao, Zhou and Zhu2015). Accordingly, it can be conjectured that the Early Cretaceous extensional setting in the southern GXR mainly resulted from the upwelling of asthenospheric mantle in the post-orogenic period of Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean closure.

7. Conclusions

  1. 1. Zircon LA-ICP-MS U–Pb dating confirms that the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry in the southern GXR formed during the Early Cretaceous Epoch (131 ± 1 Ma).

  2. 2. The petrography, geochemistry and isotope compositions indicate that the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry belongs to metaluminous to peraluminous high-K calc-alkaline A-type granite, and is derived from the partial melting of mantle-derived juvenile component (c. 80%), contaminated by assimilation of a low proportion of the lower crust (c. 20%).

  3. 3. The Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry was emplaced in a post-orogenic extensional environment related to the asthenosphere upwelling followed the Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean closure.

Acknowledgements

We thank colleagues for their assistance and Tiantong Geological Exploration Co. Ltd., Chifeng, Inner Mongolia, China for support during fieldwork. This research was supported by the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region Geological Prospecting Fund Management Center (grant no. NMKD2014-23), China Geological Survey (grant no. 121201009000150011) and China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (grant no. 2015M582300). The anonymous reviewers are gratefully acknowledged for their constructive and valuable comments.

References

Amelin, Y, Lee, DC and Halliday, AN (2000) Early-Middle Archean crustal evolution deduced from Lu-Hf and U-Pb isotopic studies of single zircon grains. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 64, 4205–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbarin, B (2005) Mafic magmatic enclaves and mafic rocks associated with some granitoids of the central Sierra Nevada batholith, California: nature, origin, and relations with the hosts. Lithos 80, 155–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baxter, S and Feely, M (2002) Magma mixing and mingling textures in granitoids: examples from the Galway Granite, Connemara, Ireland. Mineralogy and Petrology 76, 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonin, B (1990) From orogenic to anorogenic settings: evolution of granitoid suites after a major orogenesis. Geological Journal 25, 261–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chappell, BW (1984) Source rocks of I- and S-type granites in the Lachlan Fold Belt, southeastern Australia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A 310, 693–707.Google Scholar
Chappell, BW (1999) Aluminium saturation in I- and S-type granites and the characterization of fractionated hapogranites. Lithos 46, 535–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chappell, BW, Bryant, CJ and Wyborn, D (2012) Peraluminous I-type granites. Lithos 153, 142–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chappell, BW and White, AJR (1974) Two contrasting granite types. Pacific Geology 8, 173–74.Google Scholar
Chappell, BW and White, AJR (1992) I- and S-type granites in the Lachlan Fold Belt. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Earth Sciences 83, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, H, Xia, QK, Ingrin, J, Deloule, E and Bi, Y (2017) Heterogeneous source components of intraplate basalts from NE China induced by the ongoing Pacific slab subduction. Earth & Planetary Science Letters 459, 208–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clemens, JD, Holloway, JR and White, AJR (1986) Origin of an A-type granite: experimental constraints. American Mineralogist 71, 317–24.Google Scholar
Cogné, JP, Kravchinsky, VA, Halim, N and Hankard, F (2005) Late Jurassic-Early Cretaceous closure of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean demonstrated by new Mesozoic palaeomagnetic results from the Trans-Baikal area (SE Siberia). Geophysical Journal International 63, 813–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, WJ, Beams, SD, White, AJR and Chappell, BW (1982) Nature and origin A-type granites with particular reference to Southeastern Australia. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 80, 189–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cui, M (2015) The geochemical characteristics and diagenesis of ore-forming diorite-porphyrite from Shuangjianzishan Ag polymetallic deposit in Inner Mongolia. M.Sc. thesis, Mineral Deposit and Mineral Deposit Geochemistry, China University of Geosciences (Beijing). Published thesis.Google Scholar
Dong, Y, Ge, WC, Yang, H, Zhao, GH, Wang, QH, Zhang, YL and Su, L (2014) Geochronology and geochemistry of Early Cretaceous volcanic rocks from the Baiyingaolao Formation in the central Great Xing’an Range, NE China, and its tectonic implications. Lithos 205, 168–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eby, GN (1992) Chemical subdivision of the A-type granitoids: petrogenetic and tectonic implications. Geology 20, 641–44.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fan, WM, Guo, F, Wang, YJ and Lin, G (2003) Late Mesozoic calc-alkaline volcanism of post-orogenic extension in the northern DaHinggan Mountains, Northeastern China. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 121, 115–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fritzell, EH, Bull, AL and Shephard, GE (2016) Closure of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean: insights from seismic tomography and numerical modelling. Earth & Planetary Science Letters 445, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gu, YC, Chen, RY, Jia, B and Ju, N (2017) Zircon U-Pb dating and geochemistry of the granite porphyry from the Shuangjianzishan silver polymetallic deposit in Inner Mongolia and tectonic implication. Geology and Exploration 53, 495–507 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
Harris, NBW, Pearce, JA and Tindle, AG (1986) Geochemical characteristics of collision-zone magmatism. In Collision Tectonics (eds Coward, MP and Reis, AC), pp. 67–81. Geological Society of London, Special Publication no. 19.Google Scholar
Hineab, R, Williams, IS, Chappelle, BW and White, AJR (1978) Contrasts between I- and S-type granitoids of the Kosciusko Batholith. Journal of the Geological Society of Australia 25, 219–34.Google Scholar
Hu, Z, Liu, Y, Gao, S, Liu, WG, Zhang, W, Tong, XR, Lin, L, Zong, KQ, Li, M, Chen, HH, Zhou, L and Yang, L (2012) Improved in situ Hf isotope ratio analysis of zircon using newly designed X skimmer cone and jet sample cone in combination with the addition of nitrogen by laser ablation multiple collector ICP-MS. Journal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry 27, 1391–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jahn, BM, Wu, FY, Capdeviala, R, Fourcade, S, Wang, YX and Zhao, ZH (2001) Highly evolved juvenile granites with tetrad REE patterns: the Woduhe and Baerzhe granites from the Great Xing’an (Khingan) Mountains in NE China. Lithos 59, 171–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, BB, Zhu, XY, Huang, XK, Xu, Q and Zhang, ZQ (2017) Isotopic characteristics of sulfur and lead and metallogenic mechanism of Shuangjianzishan silver polymetallic deposit in Inner Mongolia. Mineral Exploration 8, 1010–19 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
Jiang, SH, Nie, FJ, Bai, DM, Liu, YF and Liu, Y (2011) Geochronology evidence for Indosinian mineralization in Baiyinnuoer Pb-Zn deposit of Inner Mongolia. Mineral Deposits 30, 787–98 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Kelty, TK, Yin, A, Dash, B, Gehrels, GE and Ribeiro, AE (2008) Detrital-zircon geochronology of Paleozoic sedimentary rocks in the Hangay-Hentey basin, north-central Mongolia: implications for the tectonic evolution of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean in central Asia. Tectonophysics 451, 290–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koschek, G (1993) Origin and significance of the SEM cathodoluminescence from zircon. Journal of Microscopy 171, 223–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kravchinsky, VA, Cogné, JP, Harbert, WP and Kuzmin, MI (2002) Evolution of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean as constrained by new palaeomagnetic data from the Mongol-Okhotsk suture zone, Siberia. Geophysical Journal International 148, 34–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuang, YS, Zheng, GR, Lu, MJ, Liu, YL, Zhang, SJ, Li, Y and Cheng, WJ (2014) Basic characteristics of Shuangjianzishan sliver polymetallic deposit in Chifeng City, Inner Mongolia. Mineral Deposits 33, 847–56 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
Larson, RL, Pitman, WC, Golovchenko, X, Cande, SC, Dewey, JF, Haxby, WF and La Brecque, JL (1985) The Bedrock Geology of the World. New York: WH Freeman and Company. Google Scholar
Li, JW, Zhao, XF, Zhou, MF, Vasconcelos, P, Ma, CQ, Deng, XD, Souza, ZS, Zhao, YX and Wu, G (2008) Origin of the Tongshankou porphyry-skarn Cu-Mo deposit, eastern Yangtze craton, Eastern China: geochronological, geochemical, and Sr-Nd-Hf isotopic constraints. Mineralium Deposita 43, 315–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, JY, Guo, F, Li, CW, Li, HX and Zhao, L (2014) Neodymium isotopic variations of Late Paleozoic to Mesozoic I- and A-type granitoids in NE China: implications for tectonic evolution. Acta Petrologica Sinica 30, 1995–2008 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Li, PZ and Yu, JS (1993) Nianzishan miarolitic alkaline granite stock, Heilongjiang – its ages and geological implications. Geochimica 22, 389–97 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Li, XH, Liu, DY, Sun, M, Li, WX, Liang, XR and Liu, Y (2004) Precise Sm-Nd and U-Pb isotopic dating of the super-giant Shizhuyuan polymetallic deposit and its host granite, Southeast China. Geological Magazine 141, 225–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, XH and McCulloch, MT (1998) Geochemical characteristics of Cretaceous mafic dikes from Northern Guangdong, SE China: age, origin and tectonic significance. In Mantle Dynamics and Plate Interactions in East Asia (eds Flower, MFJ, Chung, SL, Lo, CH and Lee, YT), pp. 405–19. Washington: American Geophysical Union 27, 405–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, CH, Bagas, L and Wang, F (2016) Isotopic analysis of the super-large Shuangjianzishan Pb–Zn–Ag deposit in Inner Mongolia, China: constraints on magmatism, metallogenesis, and tectonic setting. Ore Geology Reviews 75, 252–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, HZ (2017) Discussion on Metallogenic characteristics and Genesis of Weilasituo Sn Polymetal Deposit in Inner Mongolia. Ph.D. thesis, China University of Geosciences (Beijing). Published thesis.Google Scholar
Liu, K, Zhang, JJ, Wilde, SA, Zhou, JB, Wang, M, Ge, MH, Wang, JM and Ling, YY (2017) Initial subduction of the Paleo-Pacific oceanic plate in NE China: constraints from whole-rock geochemistry and zircon U-Pb and Lu-Hf isotopes of the Khanka Lake granitoids. Lithos 274, 254–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, YS, Gao, S, Hu, ZC, Gao, CG, Zong, KQ and Wang, DB (2010) Continental and oceanic crust recycling-induced melt-peridotite interactions in the Trans-North China Orogen: U-Pb dating, Hf isotopes and trace elements in zircons of mantle xenoliths. Journal of Petrology 51, 537–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, YS, Hu, ZC, Gao, S, Gunther, D, Xu, J, Gao, CG and Chen, HH (2008) In situ analysis of major and trace elements of anhydrous minerals by LA-ICP-MS without applying an internal standard. Chemical Geology 257, 34–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Y, Jiang, SH, Leon, B, Chen, CL, Han, N and Wan, YY (2020) Petrogenesis and metallogenic potential of the Wulanba granite, southern Great Xing’an Range, NE China: constraints from whole-rock and apatite geochemistry. Geological Magazine 157(3), 411–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ludwig, KR (2003) User’s Manual for Isoplot 3.0-a Geochronological Toolkit for Microsoft Excel . Berkeley Geochronology Center, Special Publication 4, 1–70.Google Scholar
Ma, XH, Cao, R, Zhou, ZH and Zhu, WP (2015) Early Cretaceous high-Mg diorites in the Yanji area, northeastern China: petrogenesis and tectonic implications. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 97, 393–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maniar, PD and Piccoli, PM (1989)Tectonic discrimination of granitoids. Geological Society of America Bulletin 101, 635–43.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mei, W, Lv, XB, Cao, XF, Liu, Z, Zhao, Y, Ai, ZL, Tang, RK and Munir, MA (2014) Ore genesis and hydrothermal evolution of the Huanggang skarn iron-tin pollymetallic deposit, southern Great Xing’an Range: evidence from fluid inclusions and isotope analyses. Ore Geology Reviews 64, 239–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mei, W, Lv, XB, Liu, Z, Tang, RK, Ai, ZL, Wang, XD and Cisse, M (2015) Geochronological and geochemical constraints on the ore-related granites in Huanggang deposit, Southern Great Xing’an Range, NE China and its tectonic significance. Geosciences Journal 19, 53–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meng, QR (2003) What drove late Mesozoic extension of the northern China-Mongolia tract? Tectonophysics 369, 155–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metelkin, DV, Vemikovsky, VA and Kazansky, AY (2010) Late Mesozoic tectonics of central Asia based on paleomagnetic evidence. Gondwana Research 18, 400–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miao, LC, Liu, DY, Zhang, FQ, Fan, WM, Shi, YR and Xie, HQ (2007) Zircon SHRIMP U–Pb ages of the “Xinghuadukou Group” in Hanjiayuanzi and Xinlin areas and the “Zhalantun Group” in Inner Mongolia, Da Hinggan Mountains. Chinese Science Bulletin 52, 1112–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nedelec, A, Stephens, WE and Fallick, AE (1995) The Panafrican stratoid granites of Madagascar: alkaline magmatism in a post-collisional extensional setting. Journal of Petrology 36, 1367–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ouyang, HG, Li, RH and Zhou, ZH (2016) The Jurassic mineralization of the Shuangjianzishan Ag-polymetallic deposit and its significance in prospecting: evidence from geochronology. Acta Geologica Sinica 90, 1835–45 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
Ouyang, HG, Mao, JW and Santosh, M (2013) Anatomy of a large Ag-Pb-Zn deposit in the Great Xing’an Range, northeast China: metallogeny associated with Early Cretaceous magmatism. International Geology Review 55, 411–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ouyang, HG, Mao, JW, Santosh, M, Wu, Y, Hou, L and Wang, XF (2014) The Early Cretaceous Weilasituo Zn-Cu-Ag vein deposit in the southern Great Xing’an Range, northeast China: fluid inclusions, H, O, S, Pb isotope geochemistry and genetic implications. Ore Geology Review 56, 503–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ouyang, HG, Mao, JW, Zhou, ZH and Su, HM (2015) Late Mesozoic metallogeny and intracontinental magmatism, southern Great Xing’an Range, northeastern China. Gondwana Research 27, 1153–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pan, XF, Guo, LJ, Wang, S, Xue, HM, Hou, ZQ, Tong, Y and Li, ZM (2009) Laser microprobe Ar-Ar dating of biotite from the Weilasituo Cu-Zn polymetallic deposit in Inner Mongolia. Acta Petrologicaet Mineralogica 28, 475–79 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Pearce, JA (1996) Sources and settings of granitic rocks. Episodes 19, 120–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peccerillo, A and Taylor, SR (1976) Geochemistry of Eocene calc-alkaline volcanic rocks from the Kastamonu area, northern Turkey. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 58, 63–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pei, F, Xu, W, Yang, D, Zhao, Q, Liu, X and Hu, Z (2007) Zircon U–Pb geochronology of basement metamorphic rocks in the Songliao Basin. Chinese Science Bulletin 52, 942–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pupin, JP (1980) Zircon and granite petrology. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 73, 207–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruan, BX, Lv, XB, Yang, W, Liu, ST, Yu, YM, Wu, CM and Munir, MAA (2015) Geology, geochemistry and fluid inclusions of the Bianjiadayuan Pb-Zn-Ag deposit, Inner Monglia, NE China: implications for tectonic setting and metallogeny. Ore Geology Reviews 71, 121–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shu, QH, Lai, Y, Sun, Y, Wang, C and Meng, S (2013) Ore genesis and hydrothermal evolution of the Baiyinnuo’er zinc–lead Skarn deposit, Northeast China: evidence from isotopes (S, Pb) and fluid inclusions. Economic Geology 108, 835–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sui, ZM, Ge, WC, Wu, FY, Zhang, JH, Xu, XC and Chang, RY (2007) Zircon U-Pb ages, geochemistry and its petrogenesis of Jurassic granites in northeastern part of the Da Hinggan Mts. Acta Petrologica Sinica 23, 461–80 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Sun, DY, Wu, FY, Li, HM and Lin, Q (2000) Emplacement age of the postorogenic A-type granites in northwestern Lesser Xing’an Ranges, and its relationship to the eastward extension of Suolunshan-Hegenshan-Zhalaite collisional suture zone. Chinese Science Bulletin 45, 2217–22 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Sun, SS and McDonough, WF (1989) Chemical and isotopic systematics of oceanic basalt: implication for mantle composition and processes. In Magmatism in the Ocean Basin (eds Saunders, AD and Morry, MJ), pp. 528–48. Geological Society of London, Special Publication no. 42.Google Scholar
Sylvester, PJ (1989) Post-collisional alkaline granites. Journal of Geology 97, 261–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, J, Xu, WL, Wang, F, Zhao, S and Wang, W (2016) Early Mesozoic southward subduction history of the Mongol-Okhotsk oceanic plate: evidence from geochronology and geochemistry of Early Mesozoic intrusive rocks in the Erguna Massif, NE China. Gondwana Research 31, 218–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, ZY, Sun, DY and Mao, AQ (2020) Geochemistry of Late Mesozoic volcanic rocks in the central Great Xing’an Range, NE China: petrogenesis and crustal growth in comparison with adjacent areas. International Geology Review 62(1), doi: 10.1080/00206814.2019.1590867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tian, DX, Ge, WC, Yang, H, Zhao, GC and Zhang, YL (2014) Lower Cretaceous alkali feldspar granites in the central part of the Great Xing’an Range, northeastern China: chronology, geochemistry and tectonic implications. Geological Magazine 152, 383–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, FX, Sun, HJ, Pei, RF, Liu, YF, Liu, CH and Jiang, SH (2016a) The geologic features and genesis of Shuangjianzishan Silver-Polymetallic deposit, Balinzuo Qi, Inner Mongolia. Geological Review 62, 1242–56 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
Wang, F, Zhou, XH, Zhang, LC, Ying, JF, Zhang, YT, Wu, FY and Zhu, RX (2006a) Late Mesozoic volcanism in the Great Xing’an Range (NE China): timing and implications for the dynamic setting of NE Asia. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 251, 179–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, PJ, Chen, FK, Chen, SM, Wolfgang, S and Muharrem, S (2006b) Geochemical and Nd-Sr-Pb isotopic composition of Mesozoic volcanic rocks in the Songliao basin, NE China. Geochemical Journal 40, 149–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, XD, Xu, DM, Lv, XB, Wei, W, Mei, W, Fan, XJ and Sun, BK (2018) Origin of the Haobugao skarn Fe-Zn polymetallic deposit, Southern Great xing’an range, NE China: geochronological, geochemical, and Sr-Nd-Pb isotopic constraints. Ore Geology Reviews 94, 58–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, ZJ, Xu, WL, Pei, FP, Wang, ZW, Li, Y and Cao, HH (2015) Geochronology and geochemistry of middle Permian-Middle Triassic intrusive rocks from central-eastern Jilin Province, NE China: constraints on the tectonic evolution of the eastern segment of the Paleo-Asian Ocean. Lithos 238, 13–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, ZW, Pei, FP, Xu, WL, Cao, HH, Wang, ZJ and Zhang, Y (2016b) Tectonic evolution of the eastern Central Asian Orogenic Belt: evidence from zircon U-Pb-Hf isotopes and geochemistry of early Paleozoic rocks in Yanbian region, NE China. Gondwana Research 38, 334–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wei, GJ, Liang, XR, Li, XH and Liu, Y (2002) Precise measurement of Sr isotopic composition of liquid and solid base using (LP) MC-ICP-MS. Geochimica 31, 295–99 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Whalen, JB, Currie, KL and Chappell, BW (1987) A-type granites: geochemical characteristics, discrimination and petrogenesis. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 95, 407–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, FY, Jahn, BM, Wilde, SA, Lo, CH, Yui, TF, Lin, Q, Ge, WC and Sun, DY (2003) Highly fractionated I-type granites in NE China (II): isotopic geochemistry and implications for crustal growth in the Phanerozoic. Lithos 67, 191–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, FY, Jahn, BM, Wilde, SA and Sun, DY (2000) Phanerozoic crustal growth: U-Pb and Sr-Nd isotopic evidence from the granites in northeastern China. Tectonophysics 328, 89–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, FY, Lin, J, Wilde, SA, Zhang, XO and Yang, JH (2005a) Nature and significance of the Early Cretaceous giant igneous event in eastern China. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 233, 103–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, FY and Sun, DY (1999) The Mesozoic magmatism and lithospheric thinning in Eastern China. Journal of Changchun Science and Technology University 29, 313–8 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Wu, FY, Sun, DY, Ge, WC, Zhang, YB, Grant, ML, Wilde, SA and Jahn, BM (2011) Geochronology of the Phanerozoic granitoids in northeastern China. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 41, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, FY, Sun, DY, Li, HM, Jahn, BM and Wilde, S (2002) A-type granites in northeastern China: age and geochemical constraints on their petrogenesis. Chemical Geology 187, 143–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, FY, Yang, JH, Lo, CH, Wilde, SA, Sun, DY and Jahn, BM (2007) The Heilongjiang Group a Jurassic accretionary complex in the Jiamusi Massif at the western Pacific margin of northeastern China. Island Arc 16, 156–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, FY, Yang, JH, Wilde, SA and Zhang, XO (2005b) Geochronology, petrogenesis and tectonic implications of the Jurassic granites in the Liaodong Peninsula, NE China. Chemical Geology 221, 127–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, GB, Liu, JM, Zeng, QD, Liu, MT, Sun, HS, Yin, ZW and Yin, X (2014) Occurrences of silver in the Shuangjianzishan Pb-Zn-Ag deposit and its implications for mineral processing. Earth Science Frontier 21, 105–15.Google Scholar
Wu, GB, Liu, JM, Zeng, QD, Sun, HS and Liu, MT (2013) Metallogenic age of the Shuangjianzishan Pb-Zn-Ag deposit in Geat Xing’an Range, Inner Mongolia. Acta Mineralogica Sinica 33, Supplement(619), 619 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
Wu, G, Sun, FY, Zhao, CS, Li, ZT, Zhao, AL, Pang, QB and Li, GY (2005c) Discovery of the Early Paleozoic post-collisional granites in northern margin of the Erguna massif and its geological significance. Chinese Science Bulletin 50, 2733–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, JF and Castillo, PR (2004) Geochemical and Nd-Pb isotopic characteristics of the Tethyan asthenosphere: implications for the origin of the Indian Ocean mantle domain. Tectonophysics 393, 9–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, JF, Castillo, PR, Li, XH, Yu, XY, Zhang, BR and Han, YW (2002) MORB-type rocks from the Paleo-Tethyan Mian-Lueyang northern ophiolite in the Qinling Mountains, central China: implications for the source of the low 206Pb/204Pb and high 143Nd/144 Nd mantle component in the Indian Ocean. Earth & Planetary Science Letters 198, 323–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, JH, Wu, FY, Shao, JA, Wilde, SA, Xie, LW and Liu, XM (2006) Constraints on the timing of uplift of the Yanshan Fold and Thrust Belt, North China. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 246, 336–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, WB, Niu, HC, Shan, Q, Sun, WD, Zhang, H, Li, NB, Jiang, YH and Yu, XY (2013) Geochemistry of magmatic and hydrothermal zircon from the highly evolved Baerzhe alkaline granite: implications for Zr-REE-Nb mineralization. Mineralium Deposita 49, 451–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, Y, Gao, FH, Chen, JS, Zhou, Y, Zhang, J, Jin, X and Zhang, YL (2012) Zircon U-Pb ages of Mesozoic volcanic rocks in Chifeng area. Journal of Jilin University 42, 257–68 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Ying, JF, Zhou, XH, Zhang, LC and Wang, F (2010) Geochronological framework of Mesozoic volcanic rocks in the Great Xing’an Range, NE China, and their geodynamic implications. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 39, 786–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zartman, RE and Doe, BR (1981) Plumbotectonics – the model. Tectonophysics 75, 135–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeng, QD, Qin, KZ, Liu, JM, Li, GM, Zhai, MG, Chu, SX and Guo, YP (2015) Porphyry molybdenum deposits in the Tianshan-Xingmeng orogenic belt, northern China. International Journal of Earth Sciences 104, 991–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhai, DG, Anthony, EW-J, Liu, JJ, David, S, Panagiotis, CV, Stylianos, T, Li, K, Li, PL and Sun, HJ (2020) The Genesis of the giant Shuangjianzishan epithermal Ag-Pb-Zn deposit, Inner Mongolia, Northeastern China. Economic Geology 115, 101–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhai, DG, Liu, JJ, Li, JM, Zhang, M, Li, BY, Fu, X, Jiang, HC, Ma, LJ and Qi, L (2016) Geochronological study of Weilasituo porphyry type Sn deposit in Inner Mongolia and its geological significance. Mineral Deposits 35, 1011–22 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
Zhai, DG, Liu, JJ, Zhang, HY, Yao, MJ, Wang, JP and Yang, YQ (2014) S-Pb isotopic geochemistry, U-Pb and Re-Os geochronology of the Huanggangliang Fe–Sn deposit, Inner Mongolia, NE China. Ore Geology Reviews 59, 109–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, HF, Parrish, R, Zhang, L, Xu, WC, Yuan, HL, Gao, S and Crowley, QG (2007) A-type granite and adakitic magmatism association in Songpan–Garze fold belt, eastern Tibetan Plateau: implication for lithospheric delamination. Lithos 97, 323–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, JH, Gao, S, Ge, WC, Wu, FY, Yang, JH, Wilde, SA and Li, M (2010) Geochronology of the Mesozoic volcanic rocks in the Great Xing’an Range, northeastern China: implications for subduction-induced delamination. Chemical Geology 276, 144–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, JH, Ge, WC, Wu, FY, Wilde, SA, Yang, JH and Liu, XM (2008) Large-scale Early Cretaceous volcanic events in the northern Great Xing’an Range, Northeastern China. Lithos 102, 138–57 (in Chinese with English abstract).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, ZQ (2018) Geological and geochemical characteristics and metallogenetic mechanism of the Shuangjianzishan Ag-polymetallic deposit, Inner Mongolia. M.Sc. thesis, Geology and Geochemistry of Ore Deposit, China University of Geosciences (Beijing). Published thesis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zorin, YA (1999) Geodynamics of the western part of the Mongolia-Okhotsk collisional belt, Trans-Baikal region (Russia) and Mongolia. Tectonophysics 306, 33–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. (a) Location of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt (after Liu et al. 2016). (b) Tectonic sketch of NE China (after Wu et al. 2011). (c) Regional geological map of the southern Great Xing’an Range (GXR) (after Mei et al. 2014).

Figure 1

Fig. 2. (a) Geological map of the Shuangjianzishan Pb-Zn-Ag deposit (after Liu et al. 2016). (b) Large-scale geological map of the Shuangjianzishan mining area.

Figure 2

Table 1. Ages of magmatism in Shuangjianzishan deposit, all determined by zircon U–Pb dating

Figure 3

Fig. 3. Simplified drill columnar section and photographs of intrusive contact relation.

Figure 4

Table 2. Sample collection in Shuangjianzishan deposit, all coarse-grained granite

Figure 5

Fig. 4. Hand-specimen photograph, photomicrographs and back-scatter electron image for the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry: (a) porphyritic texture; (b) quartz phenocryst and matrix quartz; (c) sericite and chlorite alteration; (d) plagioplase phenocryst; (e) K-feldspar phenocryst; and (f) biotite and accessory minerals. Pl – plagioclase; Bi – biotite; Qtz – quartz; Kfs – K-feldspar; Ser – sericite; Ab – albite; Chl – chlorite; Hb – hornblende; Ap – apatite; Zrn – zircon; Py – pyrite; Rt – rutile.

Figure 6

Fig. 5. Representative cathodoluminescence (CL) images of zircons from the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry. Numbers and ages on zircon grains are the analysed spots in Table 3.

Figure 7

Table 3. LA-ICP-MS zircon U–Pb Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry data

Figure 8

Fig. 6. Zircon U–Pb concordia diagrams for the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry. The concordia age, mean age and mean square weighted deviation (MSWD) are shown in each figure.

Figure 9

Table 4. Major- (wt%) and trace-element (ppm) contents of the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry

Figure 10

Fig. 7. (a) SiO2–K2O discriminant plot (after Peccerillo & Taylor, 1976) for the Shuangjianzishan (SJZS) granite porphyry; (b) A/CNK–A/NK diagram (after Maniar & Piccoli, 1989) for the discriminant of metaluminous, peraluminous and peralkaline rocks; (c) chondrite-normalized REE pattern; and (d) primitive-mantle-normalized trace-element patterns. Primitive mantle and chondrite data are from Sun & McDonough (1989). Haobugao data are from Wang et al. (2018), the data represented by the square are from the SJZS granite (Gu et al. 2017) and Yanshanian granites data describing the southern GXR are from Mei et al. (2014), Ruan et al. (2015), Wang et al. (2016a) and Liu et al. (2017).

Figure 11

Table 5. Sr–Nd isotopic compositions of the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry

Figure 12

Table 6. Pb isotopic compositions of the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry

Figure 13

Table 7. Zircon Lu–Hf isotopic data of the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry

Figure 14

Fig. 8. Discrimination diagrams of (a) Nb versus 10 000×Ga/Al; (b) Na2O+K2O versus 10 000×Ga/Al; (c) FeO/MgO versus 10 000×Ga/Al; (d) Nb-Y-Ce (after Whalen et al.1987; Eby, 1992). Triangle points are from Wang et al. (2018) and the square from Gu et al. (2017). A1 – anorogenic setting; A2 – post-collisional setting.

Figure 15

Fig. 9. (a) Mantle: plot of ϵHf(t) versus t (Ma) for the zircons from the Shuangjianzishan granite porphyry. CAOB – the Central Asian Orogenic Belt; YFTB – Yanshan Fold and Thrust Belt (Yang et al. 2006). (b) Orogene: ϵNd(t) versus (87Sr/86Sr)t isotopic ratio plot showing mixing proportions between two end-members (after Wu et al. 2003): (1) depleted mantle or juvenile components (DM – upper mantle peridotite; B – basalt) and (2) crustal components (LCC – lower continental crust; UCC – upper continental crust; both represented by the Mashan gneisses in the Jiamusi Block; Wu et al. 2000). The grey area represents Mesozoic granites from Wu et al. (2003). (c) Upper crust: 207Pb/204Pb versus 206Pb/204Pb diagram and (d) lower crust: 208Pb/204Pb versus 206Pb/204Pb diagram for distinguishing tectonic setting (after Zartman & Doe, 1981). Haobugao data Wang et al. (2018).

Figure 16

Fig. 10. (a) (Rb/30)-Hf-3Ta discrimination diagram (after Harris et al. 1986); (b) Rb versus (Yb+Ta) discrimination diagram (after Pearce, 1996). VAG – volcanic-arc granite; ORG – ocean-ridge granite; WPG – within-plate granite; COLG – collision granite; POG – post-collision granite. Triangle points are from Wang et al. (2018), the square from Gu et al. (2017) and the grey-shaded squares from Mei et al. (2014), Ruan et al. (2015), Wang et al. (2016a) and Liu et al. (2017).