埃达克岩与热液成矿过程中钾镁同位素分馏及其指示意义:以驱龙斑岩铜矿床为例

doi:10.13745/j.esf.sf.2024.4.22

地学前缘 ›› 2024, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (3): 150-169.DOI: 10.13745/j.esf.sf.2024.4.22

• 金属成矿作用与成矿预测 • 上一篇下一篇

埃达克岩与热液成矿过程中钾镁同位素分馏及其指示意义:以驱龙斑岩铜矿床为例

字艳梅¹^,²(), 田世洪¹^,²^,³^,⁴^,^*(), 陈欣阳⁴^,⁵, 侯增谦⁶, 杨志明⁶, 龚迎莉⁷, 唐清雨¹^,²

1.东华理工大学核资源与环境国家重点实验室, 江西南昌 330013
2.东华理工大学地球科学学院, 江西南昌 330013
3.自然资源部深地科学与探测技术实验室, 北京 100094
4.华盛顿大学地球与空间科学系, 西雅图华盛顿 98195, 美国
5.成都理工大学沉积与生物地球化学国际研究中心, 四川成都 610059
6.中国地质科学院地质研究所, 北京 100037
7.清华大学能源与动力工程系, 北京 100084

收稿日期:2023-10-25 修回日期:2024-04-25 出版日期:2024-05-25 发布日期:2024-05-25
通信作者: *田世洪(1973—),男,研究员,博士生导师,主要从事同位素地球化学与矿床学研究工作。E-mail: s.h.tian@163.com
作者简介:字艳梅(1997—),女,硕士研究生,地质学专业,主要从事同位素地球化学研究工作。E-mail: 24285054666@qq.com
基金资助:
科学技术部国家重点研发计划“战略性矿产资源开发利用”专项“我国西部伟晶岩型锂等稀有金属成矿规律与勘查技术项目(2021YFC2901900)”;科学技术部国家重点研发计划“战略性矿产资源开发利用”专项“北喜马拉雅锂等稀有金属找矿预测与勘查示范课题(2021YFC2901903)”;中国铀业有限公司-东华理工大学核资源与环境国家重点实验室联合创新基金项目(2022NRE-LH-05);自然资源部深地科学与探测技术实验室开放课题(SinoProbe Lab 202217);江西省“双千计划”创新领军人才长期项目(2020101003);江西省自然科学基金重点项目(20224ACB203011);东华理工大学高层次人才引进配套经费(1410000874)

Potassium and magnesium isotope fractionation during magmatic differentiation and hydrothermal processes in post-collisional adakitic rocks and its indicative significance: A case study of the Qulong porphyry copper deposit, southern Tibet

ZI Yanmei¹^,²(), TIAN Shihong¹^,²^,³^,⁴^,^*(), CHEN Xinyang⁴^,⁵, HOU Zengqian⁶, YANG Zhiming⁶, GONG Yingli⁷, TANG Qingyu¹^,²

1. State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Resources and Environment, East China University of Technology, Nanchang 330013, China
2. School of Earth Sciences, East China University of Technology, Nanchang 330013, China
3. SinoProbe Laboratory of Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, Ministry of Natural Resources, Beijing 100094, China
4. Department of Earth and Space Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
5. International Center for Sedimentary Geochemistry and Biogeochemistry Research, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China
6. Institute of Geology, Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, Beijing 100037, China
7. Department of Energy and Power Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China

Received:2023-10-25 Revised:2024-04-25 Online:2024-05-25 Published:2024-05-25

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为研究后碰撞埃达克质岩岩浆分异和热液过程中的钾镁同位素分馏行为及其对斑岩铜矿床岩石成因的指示意义,本文对藏南驱龙斑岩铜矿床的一套埃达克质岩石开展了钾镁同位素分析。该套岩石包括闪长质包体、花岗闪长岩和花岗斑岩,后者是超大型斑岩铜矿床的成矿母岩。已有研究结果证实,这3套岩石很可能是由同一来源的不同程度的部分熔融和分离结晶作用形成的。研究结果表明,闪长质包体、花岗闪长岩和花岗斑岩的δ⁴¹K组成分别为-0.38‰~-0.22‰、-0.43‰~-0.34‰和-0.59‰~-0.36‰。尽管3类岩石各自变化范围较小,但整体上δ⁴¹K与K₂O和SiO₂含量呈现明显负相关趋势,表明全岩钾元素迁移和钾同位素发生了解耦,钾同位素产生了分馏。在闪长质包体-花岗闪长岩演化期间,δ⁴¹K与Sc和Y含量呈明显正相关关系,这指示了在该演化期间可能主要是角闪石分离结晶导致了钾同位素分馏。相比之下,花岗斑岩中具有明显的钾同位素组成变化,在花岗斑岩演化期间,δ⁴¹K与Eu/Eu^*和Sr含量呈正相关关系,表明在岩石演化晚期钾同位素的分馏可能主要跟斜长石分离结晶有关。然而,通过瑞利分馏模拟表明仅矿物分离结晶难以实现如此大的钾同位素分馏,花岗斑岩中的钾同位素分馏是岩浆热液共同作用的结果。值得注意的是,闪长质包体具有比地幔更重的钾同位素组成,导致这种现象的原因可能是复杂多样的:一方面,下地壳可能具有比地幔更重的钾同位素组成,岩浆混合机制下导致源区具有重钾同位素组成;另一方面,驱龙斑岩铜矿床的岩浆源区受到俯冲板片来源的富重钾流体/熔体所交代,导致其源区的钾同位素组成偏重。相比之下,这3类岩石的镁同位素组成比较类似(闪长质包体:-0.36‰~-0.19‰;花岗闪长岩:-0.28‰~-0.13‰;花岗斑岩:-0.44‰~-0.13‰),并且落在了地幔和下地壳范围内。这3类岩石的δ²⁶Mg跟MgO和SiO₂含量之间不存在相关性,表明埃达克质岩浆分异过程中(角闪石和黑云母)也不产生镁同位素分馏,与前人对花岗岩中镁同位素分馏行为的结论相一致。作为典型的热液型矿床,藏南驱龙斑岩铜矿床和江西德兴斑岩铜矿床在热液蚀变过程中均产生了钾镁同位素分馏。德兴斑岩铜矿床大部分蚀变岩的钾镁同位素值都高于新鲜岩浆岩,具有显著的钾镁同位素组成变化;相比之下,驱龙斑岩铜矿床埃达克质岩岩石的钾镁同位素组成大部分位于岩浆岩基线值范围内,受热液蚀变作用影响不显著。此外,驱龙斑岩铜矿床花岗斑岩中铜大量富集,岩浆热液流体出溶是导致铜大量富集的主要原因,可能至少有两种不同性质(温度、盐度)的热液流体导致花岗斑岩中钾镁同位素组成局部波动变化,这些流体不仅改变了花岗岩斑岩的钾镁同位素组成,并且从高度演化的岩浆中提取金属元素,最终导致铜成矿。

关键词: 驱龙斑岩铜矿床, 埃达克质岩石, 钾镁同位素, 同位素分馏, 岩浆热液流体出溶

Abstract:

The study focused on investigating the behavior of potassium and magnesium isotopes during magmatic differentiation and hydrothermal processes in post-collisional adakitic rocks from the Qulong porphyry copper deposit in southern Tibet. The analyzed rocks included dioritic enclaves, granodiorites, and granite porphyries, with the latter containing a super-large copper deposit. The research confirmed that these rocks likely originated from different degrees of partial melting and fractional crystallization from the same source. The δ⁴¹K values for the dioritic enclaves, granodiorites, and granite porphyries ranged from -0.38‰ to -0.22‰, -0.43‰ to -0.34‰, and -0.59‰ to -0.36‰, respectively. While the variation in δ⁴¹K values among the rock types was small, there was a clear negative correlation between δ⁴¹K and the concentrations of K₂O and SiO₂, indicating potassium isotope fractionation during the migration of potassium in the rocks. The study suggested that the evolution of dioritic enclaves to granodiorites showed a positive correlation between δ⁴¹K and Sc and Y, implying that the separation and crystallization of hornblende played a significant role in potassium isotope fractionation. In contrast, the composition of potassium isotopes varied significantly in granite porphyries. The evolution of granite porphyries displayed a positive correlation between δ⁴¹K and Eu/Eu^* and Sr, suggesting that potassium isotope fractionation in these rocks may be primarily related to the fractional crystallization of plagioclase during late-stage rock evolution. The study also indicated that the observed potassium isotope fractionation in granite porphyries likely resulted from the combined influence of magma and hydrothermal fluid, rather than solely from mineral separation and crystallization processes. The heavier potassium isotopic composition in dioritic enclaves compared to the mantle was attributed to potential factors such as the lower crust having a heavier K isotopic composition than the mantle, and metasomatism of the magma source area by heavy potassium-rich fluid/melt from the subduction plate. In terms of magnesium isotopes, the δ²⁶Mg values for the three types of rocks (dioritic enclaves, granodiorites, and granite porphyries) were similar and fell within the range of the mantle and lower crust. There was no correlation between δ²⁶Mg and MgO or SiO₂ in these rocks, indicating that magnesium isotope fractionation did not occur during the differentiation of adakitic magma, consistent with previous findings on magnesium isotope behavior in granites. Comparing the Qulong porphyry copper deposit in southern Tibet to the Dexing porphyry copper deposit in Jiangxi, both as typical hydrothermal deposits, the study noted that the altered rocks in Dexing showed higher potassium and magnesium isotope values than fresh magmatic rocks, with significant changes in their isotopic composition. In contrast, the potassium and magnesium isotopic compositions of adakitic rocks in Qulong were mostly within the baseline range of magmatic rocks and were not significantly affected by hydrothermal alteration. The study highlighted that the large copper enrichment in granite porphyries at the Qulong deposit was mainly due to the exsolution of magmatic hydrothermal fluid. It suggested the presence of at least two types of hydrothermal fluids with different properties (temperature and salinity) causing local fluctuations in the isotopic composition of potassium and magnesium in the granite porphyries. These fluids not only altered the isotopic composition of potassium and magnesium but also facilitated the extraction of metallic elements from highly evolved magma, ultimately leading to copper mineralization.

Key words: Qulong porphyry copper deposit, adakitic rocks, potassium and magnesium isotopes, isotope fractionation, exsolution of magmatic hydrothermal fluid

中图分类号:

字艳梅, 田世洪, 陈欣阳, 侯增谦, 杨志明, 龚迎莉, 唐清雨. 埃达克岩与热液成矿过程中钾镁同位素分馏及其指示意义:以驱龙斑岩铜矿床为例[J]. 地学前缘, 2024, 31(3): 150-169.

ZI Yanmei, TIAN Shihong, CHEN Xinyang, HOU Zengqian, YANG Zhiming, GONG Yingli, TANG Qingyu. Potassium and magnesium isotope fractionation during magmatic differentiation and hydrothermal processes in post-collisional adakitic rocks and its indicative significance: A case study of the Qulong porphyry copper deposit, southern Tibet[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2024, 31(3): 150-169.

图/表 14

图1 (a)拉萨地体构造格架图;(b)藏南驱龙铜矿床地质简图;(c)藏南驱龙铜矿床典型剖面图(据文献[27,42-43]修改) 绿色三角形、黄色圆形和蓝色菱形分别表示闪长质包体、花岗闪长和花岗斑岩。BNS=班公—怒江缝合带;IYZS=印度—雅鲁藏布缝合带。

Fig.1 (a) Tectonic framework of the Lhasa terrane (modified after [42]); (b) A schematic map of the Qulong region in southern Tibet (modified after [27]); (c) Typical profile of the Qulong porphyry copper deposit in southern Tibet (modified after [43]). The green triangles, yellow circles and blue diamonds refer to the sample locations of dioritic enclaves, granodiorites, and granite porphyries, respectively. BNS=Bangong-Nujiang suture; IYZS=Indus-Yarlung Zangbo suture.

图2 藏南驱龙铜矿床闪长质包体、花岗闪长岩和斑岩的镜下照片 (a)—闪长质包体;(b)—花岗闪长岩;(c),(d)—花岗斑岩。

Fig.2 Microscopic photos of dioritic enclaves, granodiorites and granite porphyries in Qulong copper deposit, southern Tibet. (a) Dioritic enclaves; (b) Granodiorites; (c),(d) Granite porphyries.

表1 藏南驱龙铜矿床闪长质包体、花岗闪长岩和花岗斑岩的钾同位素组成及相关主量和微量元素数据

Table 1 K isotope composition and related major and trace elemental contents of the dioritic enclaves, granodiorites and granite porphyries from Qulong porphyry copper deposit, southern Tibet

样品编号与平均值	岩性	δ⁴¹K_sample/ ‰	2 SD_sample/ ‰	95%c.i._std/ ‰	N	w(K₂O^a)/ %	w(Si $O 2 a$ )/ %	Eu/Eu^*	w_B/10^-6		Nb/ Ta	(Rb/TiO₂)/ 10^-4
样品编号与平均值	岩性	δ⁴¹K_sample/ ‰	2 SD_sample/ ‰	95%c.i._std/ ‰	N	w(K₂O^a)/ %	w(Si $O 2 a$ )/ %	Eu/Eu^*	Sc	Y	Nb/ Ta	(Rb/TiO₂)/ 10^-4
QL10-4-5-1	闪长质包体	-0.37	0.12	0.06	7	2.16	59.82	0.89	16.8	13.9	16.97	71
QL10-4-9-1	闪长质包体	-0.24	0.12	0.05	7	1.5	57.27	0.67	21.8	16.4	21.11	120
QL10-4-9-1^b		-0.21	0.1	0.14	3
平均值^c		-0.22	0.15	0.05	10
QL10-4-9-2-1	闪长质包体	-0.23	0.11	0.06	7	1.54	55.75	0.7	19.8	16	23	104
QL10-4-9-2-1^b		-0.25	0.09	0.05	7
平均值^c		-0.24	0.14	0.04	14
QL10-4-12-1-1	闪长质包体	-0.26	0.1	0.05	7	1.94	56.76	0.69	20.7	12.3	19.5	118
QL10-4-12-1-1^b		-0.27	0.05	0.14	3
平均值^c		-0.26	0.09	0.05	10
QL10-4-17-1	闪长质包体	-0.36	0.09	0.05	7	2.83	58.39	0.7	14.6	16	13.68	169
QL10-4-23-1	闪长质包体	-0.34	0.14	0.06	6	2.56	59.45	0.95	13.4	10.2	16.05	151
QL10-4-25-1	闪长质包体	-0.38	0.05	0.06	6	1.95	59.55	0.75	13.1	12.3	19.7	67
QL10-4-32-1	闪长质包体	-0.29	0.12	0.06	7	1.91	57.73	0.8	19.4	14.4	20.27	115
QL10-4-32-1^b		-0.27	0.07	0.05	7
平均值^c		-0.27	0.12	0.04	14
QL10-4-7	花岗闪长岩	-0.34	0.12	0.06	7	2.79	65.75	0.87	6.97	8.25	14.41	150
QL10-4-9-2-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.34	0.12	0.06	7	2.79	65.93	0.93	6.49	5.7	23.64	140
QL10-4-9-2-2^b		-0.39	0.09	0.05	7
平均值^c		-0.37	0.14	0.04	14
QL10-4-12-1-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.34	0.1	0.05	7	2.48	64.12	0.83	6.83	10.2	15.07	116
QL10-4-15	花岗闪长岩	-0.41	0.11	0.05	7	2.89	64.71	0.87	7.08	8.29	14.62	135
QL10-4-17-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.35	0.1	0.05	7	2.55	66.24	0.9	6.74	8.6	13.45	116
QL10-4-20	花岗闪长岩	-0.4	0.09	0.06	6	2.48	64.69	0.85	7.58	9.26	14.86	123
QL10-4-23-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.43	0.09	0.06	6	2.39	65.04	0.93	6.06	8.38	11.28	131
QL10-4-32-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.36	0.11	0.05	7	2.44	64.75	0.84	6.99	10.2	12.61	126
QL10-4-32-2^b		-0.32	0.11	0.05	7
平均值^c		-0.34	0.16	0.04	14
QL10-4-52	花岗闪长岩	-0.38	0.09	0.05	7	2.84	66.91	0.81	6.05	9.01	11.72	168
601-237	花岗斑岩	-0.51	0.12	0.07	5	7.41	72.18	0.53	5.07	6.45	12.78	757
601-305	花岗斑岩	-0.47	0.1	0.05	7	7.16	70.82	0.74	4.05	4.27	14.82	727
601-305^b		-0.46	0.04	0.06	6
平均值^c		-0.47	0.08	0.04	13
601-313	花岗斑岩	-0.36	0.07	0.07	5	4.91	69.12	0.53	4.04	12	12.39	363
601-325	花岗斑岩	-0.44	0.09	0.05	7	6.76	71.18	0.72	3.75	4.2	12.53	463
601-325^b		-0.4	0.12	0.05	7
平均值^c		-0.43	0.15	0.04	14
001-245.5	花岗斑岩	-0.52	0.12	0.06	7	8.61	71.96	0.62	3.11	6.71	11.03	1 600
001-311	花岗斑岩	-0.43	0.11	0.05	7	7.85	68.67	0.7	2.68	6.67	10.77	858
001-337	花岗斑岩	-0.46	0.11	0.05	7	4.98	71.43	0.84	3.89	5.94	11.52	614
001-362	花岗斑岩	-0.59	0.19	0.08	5	6.91	69.6	0.75	3.39	6.16	11.86	732
001-362^b		-0.59	0.09	0.06	6
平均值^c		-0.59	0.17	0.05	11
001-441.6	花岗斑岩	-0.43	0.14	0.08	5	5.63	70.93	0.75	4.29	7.57	12.63	671
001-441.6^b		-0.46	0.1	0.05	8
平均值^c		-0.45	0.16	0.04	13
001-470-2	花岗斑岩	-0.48	0.14	0.06	7	7.25	72.59	0.75	2.97	7.69	12.3	1 006
001-470.2	花岗斑岩	-0.54	0.14	0.06	7	7.32	72.25	0.52	3.36	8.61	13.32	928

表1 藏南驱龙铜矿床闪长质包体、花岗闪长岩和花岗斑岩的钾同位素组成及相关主量和微量元素数据

Table 1 K isotope composition and related major and trace elemental contents of the dioritic enclaves, granodiorites and granite porphyries from Qulong porphyry copper deposit, southern Tibet

样品编号与平均值	岩性	δ⁴¹K_sample/ ‰	2 SD_sample/ ‰	95%c.i._std/ ‰	N	w(K₂O^a)/ %	w(Si $O 2 a$ )/ %	Eu/Eu^*	w_B/10^-6		Nb/ Ta	(Rb/TiO₂)/ 10^-4
样品编号与平均值	岩性	δ⁴¹K_sample/ ‰	2 SD_sample/ ‰	95%c.i._std/ ‰	N	w(K₂O^a)/ %	w(Si $O 2 a$ )/ %	Eu/Eu^*	Sc	Y	Nb/ Ta	(Rb/TiO₂)/ 10^-4
QL10-4-5-1	闪长质包体	-0.37	0.12	0.06	7	2.16	59.82	0.89	16.8	13.9	16.97	71
QL10-4-9-1	闪长质包体	-0.24	0.12	0.05	7	1.5	57.27	0.67	21.8	16.4	21.11	120
QL10-4-9-1^b		-0.21	0.1	0.14	3
平均值^c		-0.22	0.15	0.05	10
QL10-4-9-2-1	闪长质包体	-0.23	0.11	0.06	7	1.54	55.75	0.7	19.8	16	23	104
QL10-4-9-2-1^b		-0.25	0.09	0.05	7
平均值^c		-0.24	0.14	0.04	14
QL10-4-12-1-1	闪长质包体	-0.26	0.1	0.05	7	1.94	56.76	0.69	20.7	12.3	19.5	118
QL10-4-12-1-1^b		-0.27	0.05	0.14	3
平均值^c		-0.26	0.09	0.05	10
QL10-4-17-1	闪长质包体	-0.36	0.09	0.05	7	2.83	58.39	0.7	14.6	16	13.68	169
QL10-4-23-1	闪长质包体	-0.34	0.14	0.06	6	2.56	59.45	0.95	13.4	10.2	16.05	151
QL10-4-25-1	闪长质包体	-0.38	0.05	0.06	6	1.95	59.55	0.75	13.1	12.3	19.7	67
QL10-4-32-1	闪长质包体	-0.29	0.12	0.06	7	1.91	57.73	0.8	19.4	14.4	20.27	115
QL10-4-32-1^b		-0.27	0.07	0.05	7
平均值^c		-0.27	0.12	0.04	14
QL10-4-7	花岗闪长岩	-0.34	0.12	0.06	7	2.79	65.75	0.87	6.97	8.25	14.41	150
QL10-4-9-2-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.34	0.12	0.06	7	2.79	65.93	0.93	6.49	5.7	23.64	140
QL10-4-9-2-2^b		-0.39	0.09	0.05	7
平均值^c		-0.37	0.14	0.04	14
QL10-4-12-1-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.34	0.1	0.05	7	2.48	64.12	0.83	6.83	10.2	15.07	116
QL10-4-15	花岗闪长岩	-0.41	0.11	0.05	7	2.89	64.71	0.87	7.08	8.29	14.62	135
QL10-4-17-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.35	0.1	0.05	7	2.55	66.24	0.9	6.74	8.6	13.45	116
QL10-4-20	花岗闪长岩	-0.4	0.09	0.06	6	2.48	64.69	0.85	7.58	9.26	14.86	123
QL10-4-23-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.43	0.09	0.06	6	2.39	65.04	0.93	6.06	8.38	11.28	131
QL10-4-32-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.36	0.11	0.05	7	2.44	64.75	0.84	6.99	10.2	12.61	126
QL10-4-32-2^b		-0.32	0.11	0.05	7
平均值^c		-0.34	0.16	0.04	14
QL10-4-52	花岗闪长岩	-0.38	0.09	0.05	7	2.84	66.91	0.81	6.05	9.01	11.72	168
601-237	花岗斑岩	-0.51	0.12	0.07	5	7.41	72.18	0.53	5.07	6.45	12.78	757
601-305	花岗斑岩	-0.47	0.1	0.05	7	7.16	70.82	0.74	4.05	4.27	14.82	727
601-305^b		-0.46	0.04	0.06	6
平均值^c		-0.47	0.08	0.04	13
601-313	花岗斑岩	-0.36	0.07	0.07	5	4.91	69.12	0.53	4.04	12	12.39	363
601-325	花岗斑岩	-0.44	0.09	0.05	7	6.76	71.18	0.72	3.75	4.2	12.53	463
601-325^b		-0.4	0.12	0.05	7
平均值^c		-0.43	0.15	0.04	14
001-245.5	花岗斑岩	-0.52	0.12	0.06	7	8.61	71.96	0.62	3.11	6.71	11.03	1 600
001-311	花岗斑岩	-0.43	0.11	0.05	7	7.85	68.67	0.7	2.68	6.67	10.77	858
001-337	花岗斑岩	-0.46	0.11	0.05	7	4.98	71.43	0.84	3.89	5.94	11.52	614
001-362	花岗斑岩	-0.59	0.19	0.08	5	6.91	69.6	0.75	3.39	6.16	11.86	732
001-362^b		-0.59	0.09	0.06	6
平均值^c		-0.59	0.17	0.05	11
001-441.6	花岗斑岩	-0.43	0.14	0.08	5	5.63	70.93	0.75	4.29	7.57	12.63	671
001-441.6^b		-0.46	0.1	0.05	8
平均值^c		-0.45	0.16	0.04	13
001-470-2	花岗斑岩	-0.48	0.14	0.06	7	7.25	72.59	0.75	2.97	7.69	12.3	1 006
001-470.2	花岗斑岩	-0.54	0.14	0.06	7	7.32	72.25	0.52	3.36	8.61	13.32	928

表2 藏南驱龙铜矿床闪长质包体、花岗闪长岩和花岗斑岩的镁同位素组成及相关主量和微量元素数据

Table 2 Mg isotope composition and related major and trace elemental contents of the dioritic enclaves, granodiorites and granite porphyries from Qulong porphyry copper deposit, southern Tibet

样品编号与平均值	岩性	δ²⁶Mg/ ‰	2 SD/ ‰	δ²⁵Mg/ ‰	2 SD/ ‰	w(MgO^a)/ %	w(Si $O 2 a$ )/ %	CIA^a	w(LOI^a)/ %	w(Cu^a)/ 10^-6	w(Sr^a)/ 10^-6	(⁸⁷Sr/ ⁸⁶Sr $) i a$	ε_Nd(t)^a
QL10-4-5-1	闪长质包体	-0.36	0.07	-0.23	0.05	3.55	59.82	44.8	0.71	100	971	0.704 854	0.04
QL10-4-9-1	闪长质包体	-0.28	0.07	-0.16	0.05	4.31	57.27	44.2	0.78	228	979	0.704 843	0.37
QL10-4-9-1^b		-0.23	0.07	-0.11	0.04
平均值^c		-0.25	0.07	-0.13	0.06
QL10-4-9-2-1	闪长质包体	-0.19	0.07	-0.10	0.05	4.22	55.75	44.3	0.72	176	932	0.704 866	-0.06
QL10-4-12-1-1	闪长质包体	-0.27	0.07	-0.15	0.05	5.41	56.76	44.0	0.77	58	739	0.704 887	-0.03
QL10-4-12-1-1^b		-0.22	0.07	-0.11	0.04
平均值^c		-0.24	0.07	-0.13	0.06
QL10-4-17-1	闪长质包体	-0.29	0.07	-0.12	0.05	3.58	58.39	47.2	1.22	67	838	0.704 900	0.19
QL10-4-23-1	闪长质包体	-0.30	0.07	-0.16	0.05	3.76	59.45	45.2	0.49	34	917	0.704 887	-0.06
QL10-4-23-1^b		-0.22	0.05	-0.09	0.03
平均值^c		-0.26	0.06	-0.12	0.06
QL10-4-25-1	闪长质包体	-0.22	0.07	-0.09	0.05	2.8	59.55	45.9	0.56	46	1 032	0.704 913	-0.07
QL10-4-32-1	闪长质包体	-0.27	0.07	-0.12	0.05	4.49	57.73	44.9	0.83	69	849	0.704 908	-0.62
QL10-4-7	花岗闪长岩	-0.15	0.07	-0.05	0.05	1.57	65.75	48.9	0.6	103	1 092	0.704 896	-0.34
QL10-4-7^b		-0.18	0.06	-0.09	0.04
平均值^c		-0.17	0.05	-0.07	0.05
QL10-4-9-2-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.18	0.07	-0.08	0.05	1.52	65.93	48.3	0.39	131	1 168	0.704 970	-0.48
QL10-4-12-1-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.21	0.07	-0.09	0.05	1.68	64.12	47.8	0.4	30	1 250	0.704 904	0.93
QL10-4-12-1-2^b		-0.21	0.05	-0.11	0.03
平均值^c		-0.21	0.06	-0.10	0.03
QL10-4-15	花岗闪长岩	-0.20	0.07	-0.08	0.05	1.45	64.71	47.5	0.38	24	1 672	0.704 901	0.79
QL10-4-15^b		-0.19	0.05	-0.09	0.03
平均值^c		-0.19	0.06	-0.09	0.05
QL10-4-17-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.37	0.07	-0.21	0.05	1.5	66.24	48.4	0.41	26	1 186	0.704 916	-0.44
QL10-4-17-2^b		-0.19	0.05	-0.10	0.03
平均值^c		-0.28	0.06	-0.15	0.06
QL10-4-20	花岗闪长岩	-0.11	0.07	0.01	0.05	1.67	64.69	47.8	0.4	12	1 177	0.704 909	-0.11
QL10-4-20^b		-0.18	0.05	-0.09	0.03
平均值^c		-0.14	0.07	-0.04	0.06
QL10-4-23-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.17	0.07	-0.09	0.05	1.57	65.04	48.0	0.3	19	1 189	0.704 911	-0.59
QL10-4-23-2^b		-0.21	0.05	-0.11	0.03
平均值^c		-0.19	0.05	-0.10	0.04
QL10-4-32-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.13	0.07	-0.06	0.05	1.62	64.75	48.2	0.41	37	1 248	0.704 978	-0.18
QL10-4-52	花岗闪长岩	-0.26	0.07	-0.12	0.05	1.34	66.91	48.6	0.40	65	989	0.704 867	-0.91
601-237	花岗斑岩	-0.22	0.07	-0.09	0.04	0.81	72.18	46.5	2.8	1 034	507	0.705 004	-0.97
601-305	花岗斑岩	-0.44	0.07	-0.23	0.05	0.76	70.82	48.6	2.13	339	502	0.705 093	-0.92
601-313	花岗斑岩	-0.31	0.07	-0.15	0.05	0.83	69.12	48.3	2.29	866	624	0.705 225	-1.40
601-313^b		-0.21	0.07	-0.10	0.04
平均值^c		-0.26	0.07	-0.12	0.06
601-325	花岗斑岩	-0.42	0.07	-0.23	0.05	0.84	71.18	48.6	1.96	832	622	0.705 101	-0.85
601-325^b		-0.23	0.05	-0.11	0.03
平均值^c		-0.33	0.07	-0.17	0.06
001-245.5	花岗斑岩	-0.36	0.08	-0.18	0.05	0.58	71.96	47.8	2.39	768	346	0.705 310	-0.86
001-311	花岗斑岩	-0.23	0.08	-0.14	0.05	1.05	68.67	51.6	2.80	1 246	462	0.705 212	-0.90
001-337	花岗斑岩	-0.31	0.06	-0.15	0.04	0.80	71.43	49.4	1.99	1 253	566	0.705 195	-0.90
001-362	花岗斑岩	-0.17	0.08	-0.11	0.05	0.76	69.6	49.3	2.19	2 021	456	0.705 191	-1.12
001-362^b		-0.10	0.07	-0.03	0.04
平均值^c		-0.13	0.08	-0.07	0.05
001-441.6	花岗斑岩	-0.23	0.08	-0.14	0.05	0.9	70.93	49.5	2.71	1 585	409	0.705 220	-1.28
001-470-2	花岗斑岩	-0.31	0.07	-0.16	0.05	0.50	72.59	48.5	1.93	1 695	389	0.705 215	-1.63
001-470-2^b		-0.35	0.07	-0.18	0.04
平均值^c		-0.33	0.06	-0.17	0.04
001-470.2	花岗斑岩	-0.47	0.07	-0.29	0.05	0.54	72.25	48.0	2.11	1 542	430	0.705 181	0.11
001-470.2^b		-0.35	0.07	-0.17	0.04
平均值^c		-0.41	0.07	-0.23	0.05

表2 藏南驱龙铜矿床闪长质包体、花岗闪长岩和花岗斑岩的镁同位素组成及相关主量和微量元素数据

Table 2 Mg isotope composition and related major and trace elemental contents of the dioritic enclaves, granodiorites and granite porphyries from Qulong porphyry copper deposit, southern Tibet

样品编号与平均值	岩性	δ²⁶Mg/ ‰	2 SD/ ‰	δ²⁵Mg/ ‰	2 SD/ ‰	w(MgO^a)/ %	w(Si $O 2 a$ )/ %	CIA^a	w(LOI^a)/ %	w(Cu^a)/ 10^-6	w(Sr^a)/ 10^-6	(⁸⁷Sr/ ⁸⁶Sr $) i a$	ε_Nd(t)^a
QL10-4-5-1	闪长质包体	-0.36	0.07	-0.23	0.05	3.55	59.82	44.8	0.71	100	971	0.704 854	0.04
QL10-4-9-1	闪长质包体	-0.28	0.07	-0.16	0.05	4.31	57.27	44.2	0.78	228	979	0.704 843	0.37
QL10-4-9-1^b		-0.23	0.07	-0.11	0.04
平均值^c		-0.25	0.07	-0.13	0.06
QL10-4-9-2-1	闪长质包体	-0.19	0.07	-0.10	0.05	4.22	55.75	44.3	0.72	176	932	0.704 866	-0.06
QL10-4-12-1-1	闪长质包体	-0.27	0.07	-0.15	0.05	5.41	56.76	44.0	0.77	58	739	0.704 887	-0.03
QL10-4-12-1-1^b		-0.22	0.07	-0.11	0.04
平均值^c		-0.24	0.07	-0.13	0.06
QL10-4-17-1	闪长质包体	-0.29	0.07	-0.12	0.05	3.58	58.39	47.2	1.22	67	838	0.704 900	0.19
QL10-4-23-1	闪长质包体	-0.30	0.07	-0.16	0.05	3.76	59.45	45.2	0.49	34	917	0.704 887	-0.06
QL10-4-23-1^b		-0.22	0.05	-0.09	0.03
平均值^c		-0.26	0.06	-0.12	0.06
QL10-4-25-1	闪长质包体	-0.22	0.07	-0.09	0.05	2.8	59.55	45.9	0.56	46	1 032	0.704 913	-0.07
QL10-4-32-1	闪长质包体	-0.27	0.07	-0.12	0.05	4.49	57.73	44.9	0.83	69	849	0.704 908	-0.62
QL10-4-7	花岗闪长岩	-0.15	0.07	-0.05	0.05	1.57	65.75	48.9	0.6	103	1 092	0.704 896	-0.34
QL10-4-7^b		-0.18	0.06	-0.09	0.04
平均值^c		-0.17	0.05	-0.07	0.05
QL10-4-9-2-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.18	0.07	-0.08	0.05	1.52	65.93	48.3	0.39	131	1 168	0.704 970	-0.48
QL10-4-12-1-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.21	0.07	-0.09	0.05	1.68	64.12	47.8	0.4	30	1 250	0.704 904	0.93
QL10-4-12-1-2^b		-0.21	0.05	-0.11	0.03
平均值^c		-0.21	0.06	-0.10	0.03
QL10-4-15	花岗闪长岩	-0.20	0.07	-0.08	0.05	1.45	64.71	47.5	0.38	24	1 672	0.704 901	0.79
QL10-4-15^b		-0.19	0.05	-0.09	0.03
平均值^c		-0.19	0.06	-0.09	0.05
QL10-4-17-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.37	0.07	-0.21	0.05	1.5	66.24	48.4	0.41	26	1 186	0.704 916	-0.44
QL10-4-17-2^b		-0.19	0.05	-0.10	0.03
平均值^c		-0.28	0.06	-0.15	0.06
QL10-4-20	花岗闪长岩	-0.11	0.07	0.01	0.05	1.67	64.69	47.8	0.4	12	1 177	0.704 909	-0.11
QL10-4-20^b		-0.18	0.05	-0.09	0.03
平均值^c		-0.14	0.07	-0.04	0.06
QL10-4-23-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.17	0.07	-0.09	0.05	1.57	65.04	48.0	0.3	19	1 189	0.704 911	-0.59
QL10-4-23-2^b		-0.21	0.05	-0.11	0.03
平均值^c		-0.19	0.05	-0.10	0.04
QL10-4-32-2	花岗闪长岩	-0.13	0.07	-0.06	0.05	1.62	64.75	48.2	0.41	37	1 248	0.704 978	-0.18
QL10-4-52	花岗闪长岩	-0.26	0.07	-0.12	0.05	1.34	66.91	48.6	0.40	65	989	0.704 867	-0.91
601-237	花岗斑岩	-0.22	0.07	-0.09	0.04	0.81	72.18	46.5	2.8	1 034	507	0.705 004	-0.97
601-305	花岗斑岩	-0.44	0.07	-0.23	0.05	0.76	70.82	48.6	2.13	339	502	0.705 093	-0.92
601-313	花岗斑岩	-0.31	0.07	-0.15	0.05	0.83	69.12	48.3	2.29	866	624	0.705 225	-1.40
601-313^b		-0.21	0.07	-0.10	0.04
平均值^c		-0.26	0.07	-0.12	0.06
601-325	花岗斑岩	-0.42	0.07	-0.23	0.05	0.84	71.18	48.6	1.96	832	622	0.705 101	-0.85
601-325^b		-0.23	0.05	-0.11	0.03
平均值^c		-0.33	0.07	-0.17	0.06
001-245.5	花岗斑岩	-0.36	0.08	-0.18	0.05	0.58	71.96	47.8	2.39	768	346	0.705 310	-0.86
001-311	花岗斑岩	-0.23	0.08	-0.14	0.05	1.05	68.67	51.6	2.80	1 246	462	0.705 212	-0.90
001-337	花岗斑岩	-0.31	0.06	-0.15	0.04	0.80	71.43	49.4	1.99	1 253	566	0.705 195	-0.90
001-362	花岗斑岩	-0.17	0.08	-0.11	0.05	0.76	69.6	49.3	2.19	2 021	456	0.705 191	-1.12
001-362^b		-0.10	0.07	-0.03	0.04
平均值^c		-0.13	0.08	-0.07	0.05
001-441.6	花岗斑岩	-0.23	0.08	-0.14	0.05	0.9	70.93	49.5	2.71	1 585	409	0.705 220	-1.28
001-470-2	花岗斑岩	-0.31	0.07	-0.16	0.05	0.50	72.59	48.5	1.93	1 695	389	0.705 215	-1.63
001-470-2^b		-0.35	0.07	-0.18	0.04
平均值^c		-0.33	0.06	-0.17	0.04
001-470.2	花岗斑岩	-0.47	0.07	-0.29	0.05	0.54	72.25	48.0	2.11	1 542	430	0.705 181	0.11
001-470.2^b		-0.35	0.07	-0.17	0.04
平均值^c		-0.41	0.07	-0.23	0.05

图3 藏南驱龙铜矿床闪长质包体、花岗闪长岩、花岗斑岩的钾镁同位素组成与全岩化学成分相关图解 (a)—δ41K-SiO2图解;(b)—δ41K-K2O图解;(c)—δ26Mg-SiO2图解;(d)—δ26Mg-MgO图解。灰色区域代表地幔平均δ41K和δ26Mg值(δ41K=-0.42‰±0.08‰[9]; δ26Mg=-0.25‰±0.07‰[56]),误差棒代表2 SD,图例与图1相一致。

Fig.3 (a) δ41K versus SiO2, (b) δ41K versus K2O, (c) δ26Mg versus SiO2 and (d) δ26Mg versus MgO diagrams for dioritic enclaves, porphyries and granite porphyries in Qulong copper deposit, southern Tibet. The gray bar represents the average δ41K and δ26Mg values of the mantle (δ41K=-0.42‰±0.08‰[9]; δ26Mg=-0.25‰±0.07‰[56]), respectively. Error bars represent 2 SD uncertainties. Symbols are as in Fig.1.

图4 藏南驱龙铜矿床闪长质包体、花岗闪长岩和花岗斑岩的钾镁同位素与化学蚀变指数(CIA)相关性图解 (a)—δ41K-CIA图解;(b)—δ26Mg-CIA图解。误差棒代表2 SD,图例与图1相一致。

Fig.4 (a) δ41K versus CIA and (b) δ26Mg versus CIA diagrams for dioritic enclaves, granodiorites and granite porphyries in Qulong copper deposit, southern Tibet. Error bars represent 2 SD uncertainties. Symbols are as in Fig.1.

图5 藏南驱龙斑岩铜矿床闪长质包体、花岗闪长岩、花岗斑岩中角闪石、斜长石分离结晶指标与δ41K相关性 (a)—δ41K-Sc图解;(b)—δ41K-Y图解;(c)—δ41K-Eu/Eu*图解;(d)—δ41K-Sr图解。误差棒代表2 SD,图例与图1相一致。

Fig.5 (a) δ41K versus Sc, (b) δ41K versus Y, (c) δ41K versus Eu/Eu* and (d) δ41K versus Sr diagrams for dioritic enclaves, granodiorites and granite porphyries in Qulong copper deposit, southern Tibet. Error bars represent 2 SD uncertainties. Symbols are as in Fig.1.

图6 藏南驱龙斑岩铜矿床闪长质包体、花岗闪长岩、花岗斑岩中矿物分离结晶过程δ41K的瑞利分馏模型误差棒代表2 SD,图例与图1相一致。

Fig.6 Rayleigh distillation model of δ41K during the fractional crystallization of minerals for dioritic enclaves, granodiorites and granite porphyries in Qulong porphyry copper deposit, southern Tibet. Error bars represent 2 SD uncertainties. Symbols are as in Fig.1.

图7 藏南驱龙斑岩铜矿床闪长质包体、花岗闪长岩、花岗斑岩的钾镁同位素组成与Rb/TiO2和Nb/Ta相关图解 (a)—δ41K-Rb/TiO2图解;(b)—δ26Mg-Rb/TiO2图解;(c)—δ41K-Nb/Ta图解;(d)—δ26Mg-Nb/Ta图解。误差棒代表2 SD,图例与图1相一致。

Fig.7 (a) δ41K versus Rb/TiO2, (b) δ26Mg versus Rb/TiO2, (c) δ41K versus Nb/Ta and (d) δ26Mg versus Rb/TiO2 diagrams for dioritic enclaves, granodiorites and granite porphyries in Qulong copper deposit, southern Tibet. Error bars represent 2 SD uncertainties. Symbols are as in Fig.1.

图8 (a)球粒陨石标准化稀土配分模式图;(b)原始地幔标准化微量元素蛛网图;(c)δ7Li -(87Sr/86Sr)i图解;(d)δ7Li-εNd(t)图解(图片引自文献[27])

Fig.8 (a)The primitive mantle-normalized trace element patterns, (b)chondrite-normalized rare earth element (REE) patterns, (c) δ7Li versus87Sr/86Sr and (d) δ7Li versus εNd(t) diagrams for dioritic enclaves, granodiorites and granite porphyries in Qulong copper deposit, southern Tibet. The basemaps from [27].

图9 藏南驱龙斑岩铜矿床闪长质包体的钾镁同位素组成与Sr-Nd相关性图解 (a)—δ41K-87Sr/86Sr图解;(b)—δ26Mg-87Sr/86Sr图解;(c)—δ41K-εNd(t)图解;(d)—δ26Mg-εNd(t)图解。误差棒代表2 SD,图例与图1相一致。

Fig.9 (a) δ41K versus87Sr/86Sr, (b) δ26Mg versus87Sr/86Sr, (c)δ41K versus εNd(t) and (d) δ26Mg versus εNd(t) diagrams for dioritic enclaves in Qulong copper deposit, southern Tibet. Error bars represent 2 SD uncertainties. Symbols are as in Fig.1.

图10 藏南驱龙斑岩铜矿床闪长质包体、花岗闪长岩、花岗斑岩的钾镁同位素与铜含量相关性图解 (a)—δ41K-Cu图解;(b)—δ26Mg-Cu图解;(c)—Rb/TiO2-Cu图解;(d)—Nb/Ta-Cu图解。灰色区域代表地幔平均δ41K和δ26Mg值(δ41K=-0.42‰±0.08‰[9]; δ26Mg=-0.25‰±0.07‰[56]),误差棒代表2 SD,图例与图1相一致。

Fig.10 (a) δ41K versus Cu, (b) δ26Mg versus Cu, (c) Rb/TiO2 versus Cu and (d) Nb/Ta versus Cu diagrams for dioritic enclaves, granodiorites and granite porphyries in the Qulong copper deposit, southern Tibet. The gray bar represents the average δ41K and δ26Mg values of the mantle (δ41K=-0.42‰±0.08‰[9]; δ26Mg=-0.25‰±0.07‰[56]). Error bars represent 2 SD uncertainties. Symbols are as in Fig.1.

图11 (a)δ7Li-SiO2图解;(b)δ7Li-Cu图解(图片引自文献[27]) 误差棒代表2 SD,图例与图9相一致。

Fig.11 (a)Cu versus SiO2 diagram; (b)δ7Li versus Cu diagram. The basemaps adapted from [27]. Error bars represent 2 SD uncertainties. Symbols are as in Fig.9.

图12 (a)德兴斑岩矿床蚀变岩K-Mg同位素二元图解;(b)驱龙斑岩矿床花岗斑岩K-Mg同位素二元图解(图片引自文献[16])

Fig.12 (a)δ41K versus δ26Mg diagram of altered rocks in the Dexing porphyry copper deposit (basemaps adapted from [16]);(b)δ41K versus δ26Mg diagram of Qulong porphyry copper deposit

参考文献 98

[1]	BERGLUND M, WIESER M E. Isotopic compositions of the elements 2009 (IUPAC technical report)[J]. Pure and Applied Chemistry, 2011, 83(2): 397-410.
[2]	TENG F Z, DAUPHAS N, WATKINS J M, et al. Non-traditional stable isotopes: retrospective and prospective[J]. Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry, 2017, 82(1): 1-26.
[3]	TENG F Z, HU Y, MA J L, et al. Potassium isotope fractionation during continental weathering and implications for global K isotopic balance[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2020, 278: 261-271.
[4]	WANG K, LI W, LI S, et al. Geochemistry and cosmochemistry of potassium stable isotopes[J]. Geochemistry, 2021, 81(3): 125786.
[5]	LIU H, WANG K, SUN W D, et al. Extremely light K in subducted low-T altered oceanic crust: implications for K recycling in subduction zone[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2020, 277: 206-223.
[6]	LIU H, XUE Y Y, ZhANG G, et al. Potassium isotopic composition of low-temperature altered oceanic crust and its impact on the global K cycle[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2021, 311: 59-73.
[7]	HU Y, CHEN X Y, XU Y K, et al. High-precision analysis of potassium isotopes by HR-MC-ICPMS[J]. Chemical Geology, 2018, 493: 100-108.
[8]	TÉLOUK P, ALBALAT E, TACAIL T, et al. Steady analyses of potassium stable isotopes using a Thermo Scientific Neoma MC-ICP-MS[J]. Journal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry, 2022, 37(6): 1259-1264.
[9]	HU Y, TENG F Z, HELZ R T, et al. Potassium isotope fractionation during magmatic differentiation and the composition of the mantle[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 2021, 126(3): e2020JB021543.
[10]	HUANG T Y, TENG F Z, RUDNICK R L, et al. Heterogeneous potassium isotopic composition of the upper continental crust[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2020, 278: 122-136.
[11]	HUANG T Y, TENG F Z, WANG Z Z, et al. Potassium isotope fractionation during granitic magmatic differentiation: mineral-pair perspectives[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2023, 343: 196-211.
[12]	HU Y, TENG F Z, CHAUVEL C. Potassium isotopic evidence for sedimentary input to the mantle source of Lesser Antilles lavas[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2021, 295: 98-111.
[13]	WANG Z Z, TENG F Z, WU F Y, et al. Extensive crystal fractionation of high-silica magmas revealed by K isotopes[J]. Science Advances, 2022, 8(47): eabo4492.
[14]	GUO B J, ZHU X K, DONG A G, et al. Mg isotopic systematics and geochemical applications: a critical review[J]. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 2019, 176: 368-385. DOI
[15]	BERGLUND M, WIESER M E. Isotopic compositions of the elements 2009 (IUPAC technical report)[J]. Pure and Applied Chemistry, 2011, 83(2): 397-410.
[16]	LIU S A, TENG F Z, HE Y S, et al. Investigation of magnesium isotope fractionation during granite differentiation: implication for Mg isotopic composition of the continental crust[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2010, 297(3/4): 646-654.
[17]	LIU S A, TENG F Z, YANG W, et al. High-temperature inter-mineral magnesium isotope fractionation in mantle xenoliths from the North China Craton[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2011, 308(1/2): 131-140.
[18]	TENG F Z, LI W Y, RUDNICK R L, et al. Contrasting lithium and magnesium isotope fractionation during continental weathering[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2010, 300(1/2): 63-71.
[19]	HOU Z Q, GAO Y F, QU X M, et al. Origin of adakitic intrusives generated during mid-Miocene east-west extension in southern Tibet[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters: A Letter Journal Devoted to the Development in Time of the Earth and Planetary System, 2004(1/2): 220.
[20]	杨志明, 侯增谦. 西藏驱龙超大型斑岩铜矿的成因: 流体包裹体及 H-O 同位素证据[J]. 地质学报, 2009, 83(12): 1838-1859.
[21]	GAO Y, HOU Z, KAMBER B S, et al. Adakite-like porphyries from the southern Tibetan continental collision zones: evidence for slab melt metasomatism[J]. Contributions to Mineralogy & Petrology, 2007, 153(1): 105-120.
[22]	GAO Y F, HOU Z Q, WANG R H, et al. Post-collisional adakitic porphyries in Tibet: geochemical and Sr-Nd-Pb isotopic constraints on partial melting of oceanic lithosphere and crust-mantle interaction[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica (English Edition), 2003, 77(2): 194-203.
[23]	CHUNG S L, LIU D, JI J, et al. Adakites from continental collision zones: melting of thickened lower crust beneath southern Tibet[J]. Geology, 2003, 31(11): 1021-1024.
[24]	侯增谦, 杨志明. 中国大陆环境斑岩型矿床: 基本地质特征, 岩浆热液系统和成矿概念模型[J]. 地质学报, 2009, 83(12): 1779-1817.
[25]	杨志明. 西藏驱龙超大型斑岩铜矿床: 岩浆作用与矿床成因[D]. 北京: 中国地质科学院, 2008.
[26]	GUO Z, WILSON M, LIU J. Post-collisional adakites in south Tibet: products of partial melting of subduction-modified lower crust[J]. Lithos, 2007, 96(1/2): 205-224.
[27]	TIAN H C, TIAN S H, HOU Z Q, et al. Lithium isotope fractionation during magmatic differentiation and hydrothermal processes in post-collisional adakitic rocks[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2022, 332: 19-32.
[28]	侯增谦, 曲晓明, 杨竹森. 青藏高原碰撞造山带: Ⅲ. 后碰撞伸展成矿作用[J]. 矿床地质, 2006(6): 629-651.
[29]	HOU Z, COOK N J, ZAW K. Metallogenesis of the Tibetan collisional orogen: a review and introduction to the special issue[J]. Ore Geology Reviews, 2009, 36(1/2/3): 2-24.
[30]	WANG R, ZHU D, WANG Q, et al. Porphyries mineralization in the Tethyan orogen[J]. Science China Earth Sciences, 2020, 63: 2042-2067.
[31]	ZHOU A, DAI J G, LI Y L, et al. Differential exhumation histories between Qulong and Xiongcun porphyries copper deposits in the Gangdese Copper Metallogenic Belt: insights from low temperature thermochronology[J]. Ore Geology Reviews, 2019, 107: 801-819.
[32]	CHUNG S L, CHU M F, ZHANG Y, et al. Tibetan tectonic evolution inferred from spatial and temporal variations in post-collisional magmatism[J]. Earth-Science Reviews, 2005, 68(3/4): 173-196.
[33]	HOU Z Q, YANG Z, QU X, et al. The Miocene Gangdese porphyries copper belt generated during post-collisional extension in the Tibetan Orogen[J]. Ore Geology Reviews, 2009, 36(1/2/3): 25-51.
[34]	侯增谦, 杨竹森, 徐文艺, 等. 青藏高原碰撞造山带: I. 主碰撞造山成矿作用[J]. 矿床地质, 2006, 25(4): 337-358.
[35]	HOU Z Q, WANG R, ZHANG H J, et al. Formation of giant copper deposits in Tibet driven by tearing of the subducted Indian plate[J]. Earth-Science Reviews, 2023, 243(1): 104482.
[36]	WANG R, WEINBERG R F, ZHU D C, et al. The impact of a tear in the subducted Indian plate on the Miocene geology of the Himalayan-Tibetan orogen[J]. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 2022, 134(3/4): 681-690.
[37]	COLEMAN M, HODGES K. Evidence for Tibetan Plateau uplift below 14 Myr ago from a new minimum age for east-west extension[J]. Nature, 1995, 374(6517): 49-52.
[38]	BLINSIUK P M. Normal faulting in central Tibet since at least 13. 5 Myr ago[J]. Nature, 2001, 412(6847): 628.
[39]	WANG R, WEINBERG R F, COLLOINS W J, et al. Origin of postcollisional magmas and formation of porphyry Cu deposits in southern Tibet[J]. Earth-Science Reviews, 2018, 181: 122-143.
[40]	COULON C, MALUSKI H, BOLLINGER C, et al. Mesozoic and cenozoic volcanic rocks from central and southern Tibet:³⁹Ar-⁴⁰Ar dating, petrological characteristics and geodynamical significance[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 1986, 79(3/4): 281-302.
[41]	CHUNG S L, LIU D, JI J, et al. Adakites from continental collision zones: melting of thickened lower crust beneath southern Tibet[J]. Geology, 2003, 31(11).
[42]	ZHENG Y C, HOU Z Q, LI Q Y, et al. Origin of Late Oligocene adakitic intrusives in the southeastern Lhasa terrane: evidence from in situ zircon U-Pb dating, Hf-O isotopes, and whole-rock geochemistry[J]. Lithos, 2012, 148: 296-311.
[43]	YANG Z M, HOU Z Q, WHITE N C, et al. Geology of the post-collisional porphyries copper-molybdenum deposit at Qulong, Tibet[J]. Ore Geology Reviews, 2009, 36(1/2/3): 133-159.
[44]	XIAO B, QIN K, LI G, et al. Highly oxidized magma and fluid evolution of Miocene Qulong giant porphyries Cu-Mo deposit, southern Tibet, China[J]. Resource Geology, 2012, 62(1): 4-18.
[45]	JUNXING, ZHAO, KEZHANG, et al. Thermal history of the giant Qulong Cu-Mo deposit, Gangdese metallogenic belt, Tibet: constraints on magmatic-hydrothermal evolution and exhumation[J]. Gondwana Research, 2016, 36(1): 390-409.
[46]	TIAN H C, TENG F Z, CHEN X Y, et al. Multi-mode chemical exchange in seafloor alteration revealed by lithium and potassium isotopes[J]. Chemical Geology, 2022, 606: 121004.
[47]	TENG F Z, WADHWA M, HELZR T. Investigation of magnesium isotope fractionation during basalt differentiation: implications for a chondritic composition of the terrestrial mantle[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2007, 261(1/2): 84-92.
[48]	TIAN S H, HOU Z Q, CHEN X Y, et al. Magnesium isotopic behaviors between metamorphic rocks and their associated leucogranites, and implications for Himalayan orogenesis[J]. Gondwana Research, 2020, 87: 23-40.
[49]	TIAN H C, TENG F Z, HOU Z Q, et al. Magnesium and lithium isotopic evidence for a remnant oceanic slab beneath central Tibet[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 2020, 125(1): e2019JB018197.
[50]	HU Y, TENG F Z, PLANK T, et al. Potassium isotopic heterogeneity in subducting oceanic plates[J]. Science Advances, 2020, 6(49): eabb2472.
[51]	WANG Z Z, TENG F Z, PRELEVIĆ D, et al. Potassium isotope evidence for sediment recycling into the orogenic lithospheric mantle[J]. Geochemical Perspectives Letters, 2021, 18: 43-47.
[52]	CHEN H, TIAN Z, TULLER-ROSS B, et al. High-precision potassium isotopic analysis by MC-ICP-MS: an inter-laboratory comparison and refined K atomic weight[J]. Journal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry, 2019, 34(1): 160-171.
[53]	HU Y, HARRINGTON M D, SUN Y, et al. Magnesium isotopic homogeneity of San Carlos olivine: a potential standard for Mg isotopic analysis by multi-collector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry[J]. Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry, 2016, 30(19): 2123-2132. DOI PMID
[54]	TENG F Z, Li W Y, Ke S, et al. Magnesium isotopic compositions of international geological reference materials[J]. Geostandards and Geoanalytical Research, 2015, 39: 329-339.
[55]	WANG K, JACOBSEN S B. An estimate of the Bulk Silicate Earth potassium isotopic composition based on MC-ICPMS measurements of basalts[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2016, 178: 223-232.
[56]	TENG F Z, LI W Y, KE S, et al. Magnesium isotopic composition of the Earth and chondrites[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2010, 74(14): 4150-4166.
[57]	TENG F Z, YANG W, RUDNICK R L, et al. Heterogeneous magnesium isotopic composition of the lower continental crust: a xenolith perspective: Mg isotopes in the lower crust[J]. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 2013, 14(9): 3844-3856.
[58]	TIAN H C, YANG W, LI S G, et al. Approach to Trace Hidden Paleo-Weathering of Basaltic Crust through Decoupled Mg Sr and Nd Isotopes Recorded in Volcanic Rocks[J]. Chemical Geology, 2019, 509: 234-248.
[59]	CHEN H, LIU X M, WANG K. Potassium isotope fractionation during chemical weathering of basalts[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2020, 539: 116192.
[60]	SUN Y, TENG F Z, HU Y, et al. Tracing subducted oceanic slabs in the mantle by using potassium isotopes[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2020, 278: 353-360.
[61]	LI S, LI W, BEARD B L, et al. K isotopes as a tracer for continental weathering and geological K cycling[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2019, 116(18): 8740-8745. DOI PMID
[62]	吴洪杰, 何永胜, 侯振辉, 等. 大别山早白垩世花岗岩类斜长石成分: 分离结晶对全岩Sr-CaO关系的影响[J]. 科学通报, 2015(2): 8.
[63]	LIU X M, RUDNICK R L, HIER-MAJUMDER S, et al. Processes controlling lithium isotopic distribution in contact aureoles: A case study of the Florence County pegmatites, Wisconsin[J]. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 2010, 11(8):14.
[64]	TENG F Z, MCDONOUGH W F, RUDNICK R L, et al. Diffusion-driven extreme lithium isotopic fractionation in country rocks of the Tin Mountain pegmatite[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2006, 243(3/4): 701-710.
[65]	CHACKO T, COLE D R, HORITA J. Equilibrium oxygen, hydrogen and carbon isotope fractionation factors applicable to geologic systems[J]. Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry, 2001, 43(1): 1-81.
[66]	TULLER-ROSS B, MARTY B, CHEN H, et al. Potassium isotope systematics of oceanic basalts[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2019, 259: 144-154.
[67]	PAPIKE J J, CAMERON M. Crystal chemistry of silicate minerals of geophysical interest[J]. Reviews of Geophysics, 1976, 14(1): 37-80.
[68]	DOWNS R, DOWNS R T, HAZEB R M, et al. The high-pressure crystal chemistry of low albite and the origin of the pressure dependency of Al-Si ordering[J]. American Mineralogist, 1994, 79(11/12): 1042-1052.
[69]	HU X, GARZANTI E, WANG J, et al. The timing of India-Asia collision onset-Facts, theories, controversies[J]. Earth-Science Reviews, 2016, 160: 264-299.
[70]	WANG S J, TENG F Z, SCOTT J M. Tracing the origin of continental HIMU-like intraplate volcanism using magnesium isotope systematics[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2016, 185: 78-87.
[71]	KE S, TENG F Z, LI S G, et al. Mg, Sr, and O isotope geochemistry of syenites from Northwest Xinjiang, China: tracing carbonate recycling during tethyan oceanic subduction[J]. Chemical Geology, 2016, 437: 109-119.
[72]	REED M H. Hydrothermal alteration and its relationship to ore fluid composition[J]. Geochemistry of Hydrothermal Ore Deposit, 1997: 303-366.
[73]	SCHAUBLE E A. Applying stable isotope fractionation theory to new systems[J]. Geochemistry of Non-Traditional Stable Isotopes, 2004, 55(1): 65-111.
[74]	李伟强, 赵书高, 王小敏. 斑岩铜矿热液流体的K-Mg同位素示踪[J]. 中国科学: 地球科学, 2020, 50(2): 245-257.
[75]	BALLOUARD C, POUJOL M, BOULVAIS P, et al. Nb-Ta fractionation in peraluminous granites: a marker of the magmatic-hydrothermal transition[J]. Geology, 2016, 44(3): 231-234.
[76]	WANG L L, MO X X, LI B, et al. Geochronology and geochemistry of the ore-bearing porphyry in Qulong Cu (Mo) ore deposit, Tibet[J]. Acta Petrologica Sinica, 2006, 22: 1001-1008.
[77]	HOU Z, ZHENG Y, YANG Z M, et al. Contribution of mantle components within juvenile lower-crust to collisional zone porphyry Cu systems in Tibet[J]. Mineralium Deposita, 2013, 48: 173-192.
[78]	HOU Z, YANG Z, LU Y, et al. A genetic linkage between subduction- and collision-related porphyries Cu deposits in continental collision zones[J]. Geology, 2015, 43(3): 643-50.
[79]	HU Y, LIU J, LING M, et al. The formation of Qulong adakites and their relationship with porphyry copper deposit: geochemical constraints[J]. Lithos, 2015, 220: 60-80.
[80]	ZHENG Y C, LIU S A, WU C D, et al. Cu isotopes reveal initial Cu enrichment in sources of giant porphyries deposits in a collisional setting[J]. Geology, 2019, 47(2): 135-138.
[81]	LIU H, WANG K, SUN W D, et al. Extremely light K in subducted low-T altered oceanic crust: implications for K recycling in subduction zone[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2020, 277: 206-223.
[82]	PARENDO C A, JACOBSEN S B, KIMURA J I, et al. Across-arc variations in K-isotope ratios in lavas of the Izu arc: evidence for progressive depletion of the slab in K and similarly mobile elements[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2022, 578: 117291.
[83]	WILLIAMS H, TURNER S, KELLEY S, et al. Age and composition of dikes in Southern Tibet: new constraints on the timing of east-west extension and its relationship to postcollisional volcanism[J]. Geology, 2001, 29(4): 339-342.
[84]	HOU Z Q, ZHOU Y, WANG R, et al. Recycling of metal-fertilized lower continental crust: origin of non-arc Au-rich porphyries deposits at cratonic edges[J]. Geology, 2017, 45(6): 563-566.
[85]	NIE L, LI Z, FANG X, et al. Cu isotope fractionation during magma evolution process of Qulong porphyries copperdeposit, Tibet[J]. Mineralium Deposita, 2012, 31: 718-726.
[86]	HOU Z, WANG R. Fingerprinting metal transfer from mantle[J]. Nature Communications, 2019, 10(1): 3510.
[87]	GUO H, XIA Y, BAI R, et al. Experiments on Cu-isotope fractionation between chlorine-bearing fluid and silicate magma: implications for fluid exsolution and porphyry Cu deposits[J]. National Science Review, 2020, 7(8): 1319-1330. DOI PMID
[88]	CANDE P A, HOLLAND H D. The partitioning of copper and molybdenum between silicate melts and aqueous fluids[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 1984, 48(2): 373-380.
[89]	CANDELA P A. A review of shallow, ore-related granites: textures, volatiles, and ore metals[J]. Journal of Petrology, 1997, 38(12): 1619-1633.
[90]	CLINE J S, BODNAR R J. Can economic porphyries copper mineralization be generated by a typical calc-alkaline melt[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 1991, 96(B5): 8113-8126.
[91]	RICHARDS J P. Cumulative factors in the generation of giant calc-alkaline porphyries Cu deposits[J]. Superporphyries Copper and Golddeposits: Aglobal Perspective, 2005, 1: 7-25.
[92]	DAMONPE. Batholith-volcano coupling in the metallogeny of porphyry copper deposits[C]//FRIEDRICHG H, GENKINA D, NALDRETT A J. Special publication No.4 of the society for geology applied to mineral deposits. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 1986: 216-234.
[93]	CLINE J S. Genesis of porphyry copper deposits: the behavior of water, chloride, and copper in crystallizing melts[J]. Arizona Geological Society Digest, 1995, 20: 69-82.
[94]	PITZER K S, PABALAN R T. Thermodynamics of NaCl in steam[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 1986, 50 (7): 1445-1454.
[95]	杨志明, 谢玉玲, 李光明, 等. 西藏冈底斯斑岩铜矿带驱龙铜矿成矿流体特征及其演化[J]. 地质与勘探, 2005, 41(2): 21-26.
[96]	SEEDORFF E, DILLES J H, PROFFETT J M, et al. Por-phyry deposits: characteristics and origin of hypogene fea-ture SL[J]. Economic Geology, 2005, 29: 251-298.
[97]	LI J, HUANG X L, WEI G J, et al. Lithium isotope fractionation during magmatic differentiation and hydrothermal processes in rare-metal granites[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2018, 240: 64-79.
[98]	BAO C, CHEN B, LIU C, et al. Lithium isotopic systematics of ore-forming fluid in the orogenic gold deposits, Jiaodong Peninsula (East China): implications for ore-forming mechanism[J]. Ore Geology Reviews, 2021, 136: 104254.

埃达克岩与热液成矿过程中钾镁同位素分馏及其指示意义:以驱龙斑岩铜矿床为例

Potassium and magnesium isotope fractionation during magmatic differentiation and hydrothermal processes in post-collisional adakitic rocks and its indicative significance: A case study of the Qulong porphyry copper deposit, southern Tibet

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 14

参考文献 98

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	史凯, 徐丽娟, 苏煜雯, 刘春阳, 马海波, 刘盛遨. 铬同位素在高温岩浆过程中的研究进展[J]. 地学前缘, 2022, 29(1): 364-376.
[2]	夏芝广, 胡忠亚, 刘传, 魏海珍, 李伟强. 蒸发岩非传统稳定同位素研究综述[J]. 地学前缘, 2021, 28(6): 29-45.
[3]	王昆, 李伟强, 李石磊. 钾稳定同位素研究综述[J]. 地学前缘, 2020, 27(3): 104-122.
[4]	刘茜, 王奕菁, 魏海珍. 稳定氯同位素地球化学研究进展[J]. 地学前缘, 2020, 27(3): 29-41.
[5]	李银川, 董戈, 雷昉, 魏海珍. 硼同位素分馏的实验理论认识和矿床地球化学研究进展[J]. 地学前缘, 2020, 27(3): 14-28.
[6]	刘冰月，张冬冬，何玲，朱优峰. 腈菌唑在茶园土壤中的对映体选择性降解与碳同位素分馏[J]. 地学前缘, 2019, 26(6): 13-18.
[7]	张洪铭，黄士春，李曙光. 高温Ca同位素地球化学研究进展与双稀释剂校正[J]. 地学前缘, 2017, 24(5): 402-415.
[8]	李献华, 刘宇, 汤艳杰, 高钰涯, 李秋立, 唐国强. 离子探针Li同位素微区原位分析技术与应用[J]. 地学前缘, 2015, 22(5): 160-170.
[9]	朱传威, 温汉捷, 张羽旭, 樊海峰, 刘洁, 周正兵. Cd稳定同位素测试技术进展及其应用[J]. 地学前缘, 2015, 22(5): 115-123.
[10]	黄方, 吴非. 钒同位素地球化学综述[J]. 地学前缘, 2015, 22(5): 94-101.
[11]	杨军丽, 李永兵, 田会全, 刘善琪, 孙玥, 任东方, 刘建明, 石耀霖. 基于B3LYP/LanL2DZ和B3LYP/aug-cc-pVTZ方法计算铜络合物的铜同位素分馏[J]. 地学前缘, 2014, 21(5): 116-127.
[12]	肖化云, 刘丛强. 大气环境氮同位素示踪及生物监测[J]. 地学前缘, 2010, 17(2): 417-425.
[13]	汪建国陈代钊严德天. 重大地质转折期的碳、硫循环与环境演变[J]. 地学前缘, 2009, 16(6): 33-47.
[14]	樊海峰温汉捷胡瑞忠张羽旭. 分散元素(Ge, Cd, Tl)稳定同位素研究[J]. 地学前缘, 2009, 16(4): 344-353.
[15]	李谨胡国艺张英杨贵芳崔会英曹宏明胡须龙. 生物气CO2还原途径中碳同位素分馏作用研究及应用[J]. 地学前缘, 2008, 15(5): 357-363.