USGS Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20105070R

Alkalic-type epithermal gold deposit model

Karen D. Kelley·Paul G. Spry·Virginia T. McLemore·David L. Fey·Eric D. Anderson
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This report summarizes the primary characteristics of alkalic-type epithermal gold (Au) deposits and provides an updated descriptive model. These deposits, primarily of Mesozoic to Neogene age, are among the largest epithermal gold deposits in the world. Considered a subset of low-sulfidation epithermal deposits, they are spatially and genetically linked to small stocks or clusters of intrusions containing high alkali-element contents. Deposits occur as disseminations, breccia-fillings, and veins and may be spatially and genetically related to skarns and low-grade porphyry copper (Cu) or molybdenum (Mo) systems. Gold commonly occurs as native gold, precious metal tellurides, and as sub-micron gold in arsenian pyrite. Quartz, carbonate, fluorite, adularia, and vanadian muscovite/roscoelite are the most common gangue minerals. Alkalic-type gold deposits form in a variety of geological settings including continent-arc collision zones and back-arc or post-subduction rifts that are invariably characterized by a transition from convergent to extensional or transpressive tectonics. The geochemical compositions of alkaline igneous rocks spatially linked with these deposits span the alkaline-subalkaline transition. Their alkali enrichment may be masked by potassic alteration, but the unaltered or least altered rocks (1) have chondrite normalized patterns that are commonly light rare earth element (LREE) enriched, (2) are heavy rare earth element (HREE) depleted, and (3) have high large ion lithophile contents and variable enrichment of high-field strength elements. Radiogenic isotopes suggest a mantle derivation for the alkalic magmas but allow crustal contamination. Oxygen and hydrogen isotope compositions show that the fluids responsible for deposit formation are dominantly magmatic, although meteoric or other external fluids (seawater, evolved groundwater) also contributed to the ore-forming fluids responsible for these deposits. Carbon and sulfur isotope compositions in vein-hosted carbonates and sulfide gangue minerals, respectively, coincide with magmatic values, although a sedimentary source of carbon and sulfur is evident in several deposits. Deep-seated structures are critical for the upwelling of hydrous alkalic magmas and for focusing magmatic-hydrothermal fluids to the site of precious metal deposition. The source of gold, silver (Ag), tellurium (Te), vanadium (V), and fluorine (F) was probably the alkalic igneous rocks themselves, and the coexistence of native gold, gold tellurides, and roscoelite in several deposits is primarily a function of similar physicochemical conditions during deposition (for example, overlapping pH and oxygen fugacity ( f O2). Potential environmental impacts related to the mining and processing of alkalic-type epithermal gold deposits include acid mine drainage with high levels of metals, especially zinc (Zn), copper, lead (Pb), and arsenic. However, because alkalic-type gold deposits typically contain carbonates, which contribute calcium and magnesium ions that increase water hardness, aquatic life may be afforded some protection. Impacts vary widely as a function of host rocks, climate, topography, and mining methods. Geologic mapping to (1) highlight the distribution of potassic alteration; (2) define fault density and orientation of structures; (3) determine the distribution of alkaline rocks and hydrothermal breccias; and (4) identify uniquely colored gangue minerals, such as fluorite and roscoelite, will be critical to exploration and future discoveries. Geophysical techniques that identify potassium (K) anomalies (for example, radiometric and spectroscopic surveys), as well as magnetic, resistivity, aeromagnetic, and gravity surveys, may help locate zones of high-permeability that control advecting hydrothermal fluids. Geochemical surveys that include analyses for Au, Ag, barium, Te, K, F, V, Mo, and mercury, which are key elements in these deposits, should be undertaken along with the measurement of other pathfinder elements such as arsenic, bismuth, Cu, iron, nickel, Pb, antimony, selenium, and Zn.

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations ReportReport

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Karen D. Kelley, Paul G. Spry, Virginia T. McLemore, David L. Fey, Eric D. Anderson. 2020-11-10. Alkalic-type epithermal gold deposit model. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20105070r

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗
USGS2026

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗
USGS2026

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗