Next Article in Journal
Ore Genesis of the Jurassic Granite-Hosted Naizhigou Gold Deposit in the Jiapigou District of Northeast China: Constraints from Fluid Inclusions and H–O–S Isotopes
Previous Article in Journal
Barite Deposits of Türkiye: A Review
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Minerals
Volume 15
Issue 7
10.3390/min15070695
minerals-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Formation Age and Geological Setting of the Huoqiu Group in the Southern Margin of North China Craton: Implication for BIF-Type Iron Prospecting Potentiality

by
Lizhi Xue
1,
Rongzhen Tang
1,*,
Xinkai Chen
1,
Jiashuo Cao
1 and
Yanjing Chen
1,2,*
1
Key Laboratory of Crustal and Orogenic Evolution, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
2
The State 305 Project Office of the People’s Government of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, Urumqi 830000, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Minerals 2025, 15(7), 695; https://doi.org/10.3390/min15070695
Submission received: 12 May 2025 / Revised: 26 June 2025 / Accepted: 27 June 2025 / Published: 29 June 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Mineral Geochemistry and Geochronology)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

The Huoqiu Group is located in the southern margin of the North China Craton and is considered an Archean geologic body. Its supracrustal rocks are divided into the Huayuan, Wuji, and Zhouji formations in ascending order. The Wuji and Zhouji formations contain large BIF-type iron deposits. The BIFs show geological and geochemical features of Paleoproterozoic Lake Superior-type rather than Archean Algoma-type. The study of the formation ages and evolutionary history of the Huoqiu Terrane will provide significant guidance for the mineralization and exploration of the Huoqiu iron deposits. In this paper, we collected all available isotopic ages and Hf isotopic compositions obtained from the Huoqiu Terrane and reassessed their accuracy and geological meanings. We conclude that the Wuji and Zhouji formations were not older than 2343 Ma. Therefore, the BIFs hosted in the Wuji and Zhouji formations must be of Paleoproterozoic age. The magmatic zircons from the TTG gneisses and granite yield U-Pb ages of Neoarchean Era, indicating that the Wuji and Zhouji formations of the Huoqiu Group were deposited on an Archean granitic basement that mainly comprises the trondhjemite-tonalite-granodiorite (TTG) gneisses and granites of the “Huayuan Formation”. The Early Precambrian crystalline basement in the Huoqiu area can be divided into the Huayuan Gneiss Complex and the Huoqiu Group, comprising the Wuji and Zhouji formations. The tectonic scenario of granitic complexes overlain by supracrustal rocks in the Huoqiu Terrane has been recognized in the Songshan, Zhongtiao, Xiaoshan, and Lushan Early Precambrian terranes in the southern margin of the North China Craton. As indicated by the zircon U-Pb ages and εHf(t) data, the crustal growth of the Huoqiu Terrane occurred mainly at ~2.9 Ga and ~2.7 Ga. Based on the sedimentary age, environment, and rhythm, the BIFs in the Huoqiu region are considered to be of Lake Superior type and of great potential for Fe ore exploration.

1. Introduction

Banded iron formations (BIFs) are marine chemical sedimentary rocks characterized by alternating bands of chert and iron-rich minerals (magnetite and hematite), with total iron (TFe) content greater than 15% [1,2]. Banded iron formations (BIFs), primarily formed during the Archean and Paleoproteroic eras [3], are the most important source of iron ore worldwide, accounting for more than 90% of global iron ore reserves [4]. Based on depositional settings and lithological assemblages, BIFs have been subdivided into Algoma, Lake Superior, and Rapitan types [5]. Algoma-type BIFs are generally smaller and thinner in lateral extent, hosted in volcanic rocks, and genetically related to hydrothermal exhalation close to volcanic centers. Lake Superior-type BIFs are typically larger in scale, deposited in near-shore continental shelf environments, and interbedded with carbonates, quartzites, and black shales. World-class BIFs (>105 Gt Fe each) belong to the Lake Superior-type [3]. Rapitan-type BIFs are hosted in Neoproterozoic glaciogenic sediments and are associated with Neoproterozoic Snowball Earth events [6].
The North China Craton (NCC) has a formation and evolutionary history of over 3.80 Ga and contains zircons aged up to 4.00–4.10 Ga [7,8,9,10,11,12,13] (Figure 1). Tectono-thermal events around 2.5 Ga are strongly recorded in different regions of the NCC. Recent studies have shown that the NCC experienced significant crustal growth events around 2.70 Ga [14,15,16], which were extensively overprinted by tectono-magmatic events around 2.50 Ga [17].
In the southern NCC, the Early Precambrian crystalline basement is exposed as blocks or terranes, including the Huaxiong Block (including Xiaoqinling, Xiaoshan, Xiongershan, Lushan, and Wuyang terranes), the Zhongtiao Block, the Songji Block (including Songshan, Jishan, and Xuchang terranes), the Huoqiu Terrane, and the Wuhe Terrane. Wan et al. (2015) classified these tectonic units as the “Southern Ancient Terrane (SAT)” [19], whilst Diwu et al. (2016) referred to them as the “Southern Archean Block (SAB)” [20]. Large BIF-type Fe deposits have been discovered in some terranes, such as the Wuyang and Huoqiu terranes [21]. The Huoqiu terrane hosts several large Fe deposits, including Zhouji, Zhangzhuang, Lilaozhuang, Zhouyoufang, Fanqiao, Wuji, and Lilou [22], with a total proven reserve of 1.712 × 108 t Fe and an inferred reserve of 2.0 × 108 t Fe [23].
Due to the significance of iron ores, the Huoqiu terrane has been frequently investigated in geology, geochronology, and geochemistry, resulting in a wealth of data and several important insights. Three main viewpoints have been proposed regarding the type of Huoqiu BIF: (1) The Algoma type, because the protoliths of the ore-hosting rocks are considered to be intermediate to mafic volcanic rocks located in the upper stratigraphic position of greenstone belts [24,25]; (2) a transition between the Algoma and Lake Superior types [23,26]; and (3) the Lake Superior type, evidenced by sulfur and iron isotope compositions [27,28].
The formation age of the Huoqiu BIF is commonly considered to be Neoarchean, but the available isotope ages vary widely. For example, Sang et al. (1981) obtained several whole-rock Rb-Sr isochron ages clustering around 2700 Ma and concluded that the Huoqiu Group belongs to the Neoarchean [29]. Some researchers have dated intercalated volcanic rocks to constrain their depositional ages. Huang (2014) and Wang et al. (2021) dated volcanic interlayers in BIF orebodies, and proposed that the Huoqiu BIF was formed at ~2.75 Ga [25,26]. However, according to the wide zircon age variation and high roundness, their samples are more likely to be para-metamorphic rocks. Other studies have used detrital zircons to constrain the upper limit of the age of deposition. Liu and Yang (2015) obtained a minimum detrital zircon age peak of 2.75 Ga from BIF samples, and constrained the formation age of the Huoqiu BIF to 2.75–2.71 Ga or 2.75–2.56 Ga due to regional magmatic events [28]. However, their further work showed that detrital zircons in the para-gneisses from the Huoqiu Group yielded 207Pb/206Pb ages of 2343–3997 Ma [30]. They used these ages to discuss episodic crustal growth in the Huoqiu region and ignored their importance for the depositional age of the Huoqiu Group. Hou et al. (2017) reported the youngest detrital age of 2546 ± 12 Ma from biotite-plagioclase gneiss samples collected from the wall-rock of iron orebodies, and combined with metamorphic zircon ages, they constrained that the Huoqiu iron was deposited at 2.54–1.88 Ga [31]. Wan et al. (2010) constrained the formation time of the Huoqiu Group to 2.75–1.84 Ga based on metamorphic and detrital zircons [32]. This broad range of ages underscores the need for further research and more detailed analyses.
In this paper, we collected available isotopic age data from the Huoqiu Group and related Early Precambrian rocks, clarified their geological meaning, and accordingly, proposed our new understanding of the formation age and genetic type of BIF, and discussed the Early Precambrian evolution of the crystalline basement of the Huoqiu terrane. Moreover, we briefly discuss the depositional environment and the prospecting potential of the BIF-type iron ores in the Huoqiu terrane.

2. Geological Background

The Early Precambrian crystalline basement of the Huoqiu Terrane is commonly referred to as the “Huoqiu Group”. However, it does not strictly conform to the formal stratigraphic standards [32,33] (Figure 2). The crystalline basement is covered by Mesoproterozoic to Neoproterozoic strata and Quaternary sediments, with small outcrops occurring between Nanzhaoji and Wuji towns. Geological studies have mainly relied on drilling and geophysical surveys due to limited exposure. Based on lithological data from drill cores, previous studies have divided the Huoqiu Group into three formations in ascending order: the Huayuan, Wuji, and Zhouji formations (Figure 3). The Huayuan Formation is primarily composed of migmatized biotite-hornblende-plagioclase gneisses, migmatized granitic gneisses, and granitoids. The Wuji Formation is divided into two sections: the lower section, composed of banded migmatite, migmatized biotite-plagioclase granulite, and hornblende-biotite-plagioclase gneiss, and the upper section, consisting of biotite-plagioclase granulite, garnet-plagioclase-biotite schist, magnetite quartzite, and a small amount of dolomitic marble and plagioclase amphibolite. The Zhouji Formation is also divided into two parts: the lower part, dominated by biotite-plagioclase granulite, biotite-plagioclase gneiss, hornblende-plagioclase gneiss, and magnetite, and the upper part, composed of dolomitic marble, quartz schist, and magnetite quartzite. In general, the crystalline basement of the Huoqiu Terrane has undergone low-amphibolite facies metamorphism [34].

3. Statistical Analysis of Zircon Ages and Hf Isotopic Data

Constraining the depositional ages of sedimentary sequences is challenging, and various methods have been employed to address this issue. One of the most commonly used methods is to date intercalated volcanic rocks, which provides an approximate age for deposition [35,36]. Another method involves dating detrital zircons and cross-cutting intrusive rocks, which helps establish the upper and lower limits for the depositional age, thereby determining the age range of sedimentation [37]. Previous studies generally take the weighted mean age or minimum peak age of the detrital zircons in para-metamorphic rocks as the deposition age, which overlooks individual zircon grains that deviate from the main age clusters. Detrital zircons in para-metamorphic rocks may be derived from different source regions, and the youngest detrital zircon age should closely approximate the upper limit of the depositional age. Clearly, the weighted mean age of detrital zircons may significantly overestimate and deviate from the true depositional age.
Tera-Wasserburg concordia diagrams can be constructed by analyzing the concordance of zircon 206Pb/238U and 207Pb/206Pb ages [38]. For magmatic zircons, multi-grain concordia analyses not only provide crystallization ages but also record subsequent tectono-thermal events [39]. For detrital zircons, since they may be derived from multiple terranes or source regions of different ages, the concordance value is the only criterion for determining the reliability of individual zircon ages [40]. The Huoqiu Terrane has experienced multiple tectono-thermal events, during which zircon grains may have undergone varying degrees of Pb loss. However, because 206Pb and 207Pb have similar chemical properties and loss rates during metamorphism, the 207Pb/206Pb age is less influenced by Pb loss. Therefore, in this study, we selected 207Pb/206Pb ages with concordance values between 90% and 110% for further analysis [41].
Additionally, we compiled Lu–Hf isotopic data from magmatic zircons in TTG gneisses, meta-mafic rocks, and crust-derived granites, as well as from detrital zircons in para-metamorphic rocks in the Huoqiu Terrane. The calculation of εHf(t) adopts a 176Lu decay constant of 1.867 × 10−11 per year [42]. The chondritic uniform reservoir (CHUR) values are 176Lu/177Hf = 0.0332 and 176Lu/177Hf = 0.282772 [43]. Single-stage Hf mode ages (TDM1) are calculated relative to the depleted mantle with a present-day 176Hf/177Hf ratio of 0.28325 and a 176Lu/177Hf ratio of 0.0384 [44]. For two-stage Hf model age (TDM2) calculations, the average 176Lu/177Hf ratio for the continental crust was set at 0.015 [45].

3.1. Statistical Results of the Wuji and Zhouji Formations

To determine the depositional ages of the Wuji and Zhouji formations in the Huoqiu Group and refine the metallogenic age of the Huoqiu BIF, this study compiles detrital zircon ages from the para-metamorphic rocks of the Wuji and Zhouji formations, as well as magmatic zircon U-Pb ages from the ortho-metamorphic interlayers and intrusive rocks within the BIF orebodies [23,25,26,27,28,30,31,32,33,46,47,48]. The results are presented in Table 1.
The 207Pb/206Pb age histogram for detrital zircons from the Wuji Formation (Figure 4a) shows two major peaks around 3.00 Ga and 2.70 Ga, as well as a subordinate peak around 2.55 Ga, indicating three significant magmatic events in the source regions. To constrain the formation age of the Huoqiu BIF, Liu and Yang (2015) reported the youngest age populations (2288 Ma and 2280 Ma for ZYF1 and ZYF9) with apparently magmatic features. Unfortunately, these minimum ages have poor concordance and show significant Pb loss, and cannot be interpreted as the depositional age [28]. However, their further work reported that four detrital zircons from biotite gneiss sample LY105.461 in the upper portion of the Wuji Formation yield the youngest detrital zircon age group around 2.35 Ga with a concordance of 95–108% (Table 2) [30]. Among them, grain LY105.461-15 has a 207Pb/206Pb age of 2383 ± 10 Ma, with a Th/U ratio of 0.82, significantly higher than 0.4, and its cathodoluminescence (CL) image shows well-developed oscillatory zoning (Figure 4c), indicating a magmatic origin. These evidences suggest that the 2.35 Ga detrital zircon group is reliable. Detrital zircon grains crystallize before their transportation and deposition; therefore, the youngest detrital zircon age provides a constraint on the maximum deposition age of the sediments [49]. In the Huoqiu Group, the youngest zircon age from the 2.35 Ga group is 2343 ± 10 Ma (spot 17 from LY105.461), indicating that the Wuji Formation was deposited no earlier than 2343 Ma.
The 207Pb/206Pb age histogram for detrital zircons from the Zhouji Formation (Figure 4b) also shows two major peaks at approximately 3.00 Ga and 2.70 Ga. The youngest detrital zircon gives an age of 2500 ± 7 Ma, which constrains the upper limit of the depositional age of the Zhouji Formation. The Zhouji Formation is located above the Wuji Formation, yet its youngest detrital zircon age (2500 Ma) is older than the youngest detrital zircon age from the Wuji Formation (2343 Ma). This phenomenon can be explained by the preferential weathering and erosion of younger rocks from the source region, which were then transported to a nearby sedimentary basin, resulting in an age pattern in which the detrital zircons from the upper part of the sequence are older than those from the lower part. In addition, the Zhouji Formation may contain detrital zircons younger than 2343 Ma, which is consistent with its stratigraphic relationship. However, limited sampling may have missed these younger zircon grains. Further sampling is necessary to better understand this phenomenon.
As discussed above, previous studies have also used minimum detrital zircon ages, metamorphic zircon ages, or magmatic intrusion ages to constrain the maximum and minimum ages of sediments. They reported formation age of the Huoqiu Group at 2.75–1.84 Ga [32], 2.70–1.80 Ga [23], 2.54–1.88 Ga [31]. These age ranges are not contradictory to our findings, and we agree with their approaches in constraining depositional ages. Given the earlier discussions on the reliability of the 2.35 Ga detrital zircon population, we further constrained the upper limit age of the Huoqiu Group to 2343 Ma.
Amphibolites have long been regarded as ortho-metamorphic rocks. The youngest magmatic zircons from amphibolite samples in the Wuji Formation (313ZX84-3, ZX84-3, ZK122-1, and WS069-1) and Zhouji Formation (ZJ) yielded ages of 2621 ± 33 Ma and 2698 ± 10 Ma, respectively, suggesting that the Huoqiu Group formed in the Neoarchean. However, these zircons exhibit a wide 207Pb/206Pb age range that exceeds 200 Ma (Table 1). Except for sample ZK122-1, for which the zircon CL images and descriptions were not provided by the authors, all other samples contained more ellipsoidal or rounded zircons that displayed typical characteristics of detrital zircons [23,25,46,47]. This indicates that the amphibolite samples in the Huoqiu Group are more likely para-metamorphic rather than ortho-metamorphic rocks. Additionally, the youngest zircon from two plagioclase gneiss volcanic interlayers (ZK2512-2 and ZK2918-1) in the Zhouji Formation yielded an age of 2680 ± 27 Ma, but these zircons also show a wide age variation and high roundness [26]. Thus, the available evidence does not support the interpretation of volcanic interlayers that the Wuji and Zhouji formations were deposited in the Neoarchean.

3.2. Statistical Results of Magmatic Zircons

The zircon ages of TTG gneiss, meta-volcanic rocks, and crust-derived granite from the Huoqiu Terrane [23,32,33,46,48] are displayed in the 207Pb/206Pb age histogram (Figure 5), which shows two major peaks at approximately 2.90 Ga and 2.70 Ga, along with a minor secondary peak at around 2.55 Ga, indicating multiple episodes of Archean magmatic activity in the region. The age distribution of these magmatic zircons is consistent with that of detrital zircons from the meta-sedimentary rocks of the Wuji and Zhouji formations, suggesting that these magmatic activities are the primary source of the detrital zircons.
Two granite samples that intrude the iron orebodies reported upper intercept ages of 1820 ± 130 Ma and 1897 ± 95 Ma [23], while two granite samples in drill cores yield upper intercept ages of 1823 ± 41 Ma and 1916 ± 42 Ma [46]. These ages constrain the formation age to be earlier than 1916 Ma. Additionally, late Paleoproterozoic (1.80–1.90 Ga) metamorphic zircons were identified in the TTG gneiss, prograde metamorphic rocks, and crust-derived granite (1842 ± 41 Ma from [32] and 1885 ± 17 Ma from [31]), indicating that the Huoqiu Terrane underwent a tectono-thermal event during the late Paleoproterozoic and that the Huoqiu Group was formed prior to 1885 Ma.
In summary, combining the youngest detrital zircon and maximum intrusive ages, the formation age of the Huoqiu Group can be constrained between 2343 ± 10 Ma and 1916 ± 42 Ma.

3.3. Zircon Hf Isotope Characteristics

Previously published zircon Hf isotope data are compiled in Figure 6 [23,30,31,33,46,50], showing that the ~2.90 Ga zircon grains possess positive εHf(t) values from −2.8 to +15.5 (average = 4.2), most of which are close to the contemporaneous depleted mantle growth curve and fall above the 0.75-DM curve. The ~2.70 Ga zircons predominantly have positive εHf(t) values from −5.1 to +8.0 (average = 1.7), but these zircons mainly fall below the 0.75-DM curve. The ~1.80 Ga magmatic zircons from granite samples typically show negative εHf(t) values from −18.1 to +12.5 (average = −5.7). Notably, both the ~2.70 Ga and ~1.80 Ga zircons fall on the ~2.90 Ga crustal evolution line.
Figure 7 presents a histogram of TDM2(Hf) model ages, indicating that zircon TDM2(Hf) ages from the Huoqiu crystalline basement are primarily clustered between 2900 and 3200 Ma, with a peak around ~3.10 Ga.

4. Discussion

4.1. Existence of >3.60 Ga Crustal Components in the Huoqiu Terrane

The NCC is one of the oldest cratons in the world and is expected to preserve substantial material information from early Earth. In the Huoqiu Terrane, a single detrital zircon (spot 14 from sample LY105.461) has a concordant age (concordance = 98%) of 3997 ± 8 Ma (1σ, CL image in Figure 4c), with a Th/U ratio of 0.44 and moderately high contents of U (121 ppm) and Pb (110 ppm) [30]. Additionally, an inherited zircon (spot 20 from sample ZK122-1) with a concordant age (concordance = 101%) of 3683 ± 11 Ma (Th/U ratio = 0.37) was found in a plagioclase-hornblende gneiss sample. These results suggest the presence of continental crustal material > 3.60 Ga in the Huoqiu Terrane.
Previous studies have reported the existence of crustal material older than 3.60 Ga within the NCC [9,10,51,52,53,54]. The most convincing evidence is that many rock samples from the Baijiafen, Dongshan, Shengousi, and Guodishan areas in the Anshan–Benxi region yield zircon U-Pb ages of ~3.8 Ga. The lithology includes mylonitized orthogneiss, granitic gneiss, and metamorphosed quartz diorite [9]. In Eastern Hebei, abundant detrital zircons aged 3.60 to 3.88 Ga have been identified in meta-sedimentary rocks from the Caozhuang Complex [51]. The Qiyugou Yanshanian granite porphyry in western Henan contains 3.85 Ga inherited zircons [10]. A 3635 Ma detrital zircon was found in a quartzite sample from the Tietonggou Formation [52]. In the western Qinling Orogenic Belt, two ancient xenocrystic zircons with ages of 4079 ± 5 Ma [53] and 4007 ± 29 Ma [54] have been identified in Ordovician volcaniclastic lava samples from the Caotangou Group. Zheng et al. (2004) reported magmatic zircons with upper intercept ages of 3655 Ma and 3670 Ma from felsic granulite xenoliths in Mesozoic volcanic rocks from the Xinyang area [55].

4.2. The Formation Age and Disintegration of the Huoqiu Group

For a long time, the Early Precambrian basements of the NCC were regarded and named as stratigraphic units, such as the Dengfeng, Taihua, and Huoqiu groups [56,57,58,59]. Since the 1980s, scholars have increasingly recognized that these basements generally consist of intrusive rocks, which exhibit varying degrees of metamorphism, deformation, and migmatization (i.e., TTG gneisses), and supracrustal rocks (i.e., meta-sedimentary and meta-volcanic sequences) [57,58,59]. The intrusive rocks and/or small amounts of strongly metamorphosed and migmatized supracrustal rocks are not suitable for subdivision into “stratigraphic” groups or formations. This led to three paradigms in Early Precambrian studies: (1) the traditional stratigraphic view and subdivision; (2) referring to the crystalline basements as “complexes”, such as the Taihua Complex, Huoqiu Complex, and Wuhe Complex [56]; and (3) disintegrating the crystalline basement into the complexes and stratigraphic units, with the complexes being intrusive rocks and/or strongly migmatized supracrustal rocks. As a result, many Early Precambrian “stratigraphic” units or crystalline basements in the NCC have been disintegrated. For example, the so-called “Dengfeng Group” in the Songshan area was subdivided into the Shipaihe Complex (>2550 Ma) and Junzhao Group (2550–2300 Ma) [57]. The crystalline basement of the Zhongtiao Block was divided into the Sushui Complex and Jiangxian Group [58]. The “Taihua Group” in the Xiaoshan Terrane was disintegrated into the >2.30 Ga Tianyemiao Complex and the <2.30 Ga Xiaoshan Group; whilst the “Taihua Group” in the Lushan Terrane was subdivided into the >2.55 Ga Beizi Complex, the 2.55–2.30 Ga Dangzehe Group greenstone belt, and the 2.30–2.10 Ga Shuidigou Group khondalite series [59].
Notably, Diwu et al. (2020) renamed the Taihua Group in the Lushan Terrane as the “Taihua Complex”, but subdivided it into the lower gneissic sequence and the upper supracrustal sequence, respectively [56]. The lower gneissic sequence consists of TTG gneisses and was formed during the Late Mesoarchean to Early Neoarchean. The upper supracrustal sequence was deposited between 2.23 and 2.13 Ga.
In the Huoqiu terrane, the “Huayuan Formation” is composed mainly of migmatites, such as migmatitic syenogranite and biotite-hornblende gneiss [33]. These rocks exhibit weak stratification but show characteristics of TTG gneiss. The augen potassic granite (FJZK01-171) and migmatitic syenogranite (NZZK01-324) yield ages of 2708 ± 50 Ma and 2709 ± 21Ma, respectively [33]. The TTG gneiss samples ZK122-2 and ZK122-3 yielded zircon U-Pb ages of 2711 ± 25 Ma and 2914 ± 14 Ma, respectively [46]. In addition, two granodioritic gneiss samples 18ABH01-1 and 18ABH02-1 yield zircon U-Pb ages of 2911 ± 11 Ma and 2929 ± 6 Ma, respectively; and a trondhjemitic gneiss sample 18ABH02-3 yields an age of 2931 ± 5 Ma [48]. The “Huayuan Formation” is mainly composed of the TTG-like and/or strongly migmatized gneisses formed around 2.9 Ga and 2.7 Ga, and therefore, more suitably to be renamed as “Huayuan Gneiss Complex”. Most likely, the Huayuan Gneiss Complex served as a basement and detrital source for the deposition of the overlying Wuji and Zhouji Formations. The Wuji and Zhouji formations can be retained as the Huoqiu Group, consisting of biotite gneiss, marble, quartz schist, and magnetite quartzite. Their depositional age is redefined as Paleoproterozoic (2343–1916 Ma). Therefore, the crystalline basement of the Huoqiu terrane disintegrated into the lower “Huayuan Gneiss Complex” and the upper Huoqiu Group supracrustal sequence.

4.3. Crustal Growth and Tectonic Evolution of the Huoqiu Terrane

The zircon age histograms of various rock types from the crystalline basement of the Huoqiu Terrane show two main peaks at approximately 2.90 Ga and 2.70 Ga, along with a minor subordinate peak at around 2.55 Ga (Figure 5), indicating magmatic activity and crustal growth events in the Archean basement or source region.
As shown in Figure 6, zircons aged 2.90 to 3.00 Ga generally exhibit positive εHf(t) values, closely resembling the depleted mantle line, with most zircons plotting above the 0.75 DM curve [60,61]. Their two-stage Hf model ages closely correspond to their 207Pb/206Pb ages (Figure 7), suggesting that the crustal material predominantly originated from a depleted mantle with a short crustal residence time, reflecting a period of intense juvenile crustal growth. If the Hf isotopic compositions observed in the studied zircons represent mixtures of different sources, the calculated two-stage model ages can represent the age of the mixed source [62,63,64]. Some zircons show relatively lower εHf(t) values and older two-stage model ages, up to 3.30 Ga (Figure 7), indicating a small contribution from the older continental crust for 2.9 Ga crustal growth. This suggests that the Huoqiu Terrane contains crustal material older than 3.0 Ga. Notably, 2.9 Ga crustal growth events were also observed in the Anshan–Benxi, Eastern Hebei, Jiaobei, and Lushan regions [65].
The majority of ~2.7 Ga zircons from the Huoqiu Terrane exhibit positive εHf(t) values, with most plotting below the 0.75 DM curve (Figure 6) and on the 2.90 Ga crustal evolution line (Figure 6). The ages of their two-stage model ranged from 2.87 Ga to 3.14 Ga (Figure 7). Additionally, the ~2.7 Ga TTG gneiss sample ZK122-2 contains inherited ~2.9 Ga zircons, indicating that the ~2.7 Ga TTG magmas were predominantly derived from the reworking of ~2.9 Ga or even older continental crust material. Plagioclase amphibolites associated with the ~2.7 Ga TTG gneiss yield ages of 2966 Ma (ZK122-1) and 3012 Ma (ZX84-3), suggesting that these amphibolites could be potential source rocks for the TTG gneisses. Some zircons exhibit higher εHf(t) values and plot above the 0.75 DM curve, representing juvenile crust derivation from the depleted mantle, although the proportion of juvenile crust is relatively low. It is important to emphasize that the ~2.7 Ga crustal growth event was a global tectono-magmatic thermal event [66,67] that strongly manifested in the NCC. Rocks recording this event have been identified in many regions of the NCC, such as Northern Liaoning, Jiaodong, Wutai, Daqingshan, and Lushan [32,56,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80]. The magmatic activity identified in the Huoqiu Terrane at ~2.7 Ga further supports the global significance of the ~2.7 Ga crustal growth event.
Compared to other cratons worldwide, the ∼2.55 Ga tectono-thermal event in the NCC was more intense [81], resulting in the formation of abundant TTGs, gneisses, and potassic granites, which comprise approximately 80% of the crystalline basement [15]. However, the zircon age histogram (Figure 4 and Figure 5) reveals only a small peak at ~2.55 Ga (2.60–2.50 Ga), indicating weak magmatic activity and crustal growth in the Huoqiu Terrane. Furthermore, most ~2.55 Ga detrital zircons exhibit negative εHf(t) values, suggesting the recycling of older continental crust. The ~2.70 Ga TTGs are widely exposed in the Huoqiu Terrane, and only one gneissic syenogranite sample (HQ0704) yielded an age around 2.55 Ga, i.e., 2564 ± 25 Ma [50]. The shortage of ~2.55 Ga detrital zircon ages likely reflects less exposure of ~2.55 Ga igneous rocks in the source regions.
The Huoqiu Terrane contains numerous metamorphic and crust-derived granite zircons aged between 2.05 and 1.80 Ga (Figure 5), including metamorphic zircons with ages of 1885 and 1842 Ma [31,32] and magmatic zircons from potassic granite aged 1916 Ma [46]. These ages indicate that the crystalline basement of the Huoqiu Terrane developed prior to 1916 Ma and was affected by global orogenic events in the Orosirian (2.05–1.80 Ga). Zhao et al. (2001) suggested that the NCC underwent subduction–accretion–collision processes between 1.95 and 1.80 Ga [82], while Zhai and Santosh [15] proposed a compression event at 1.95–1.90 Ga. Lu et al. (2021) further constrained the peak metamorphism in the region to 1.82–1.83 Ga from metapelite samples. Peak metamorphic temperatures were estimated at ~590 °C and pressures of 9.4–9.7 kbar, showing a clockwise P-T-t trajectory [34].

4.4. Genesis and Classification of the Huoqiu BIF

The Huoqiu BIF is hosted within the metamorphosed supracrustal sequences of the Huoqiu Group. The protoliths of plagioclase amphibolites in the Huoqiu Group were generally recovered as island-arc basalts, and the BIFs were considered to be Algoma-type formed in a subduction-related back-arc basin along a continental margin [27]. However, the Huoqiu Group records rhythmic cycles characterized by terrigenous clastic rocks, argillaceous shales, and carbonate rocks interbedded with ferrosilicon sedimentary formations. For example, the top of the Zhouji Formation is a 500-m-thick carbonate unit [22]. This lithologic association of the Huoqiu Group resembles that of Lake Superior-type BIFs. The Eu/Eu*PAAS ratios of the Huoqiu BIFs range from 1.57 to 1.82 [83], corresponding to those of Lake Superior-type BIFs (Eu/Eu*PAAS < 1.8), instead of Algoma-type BIFs (Eu/Eu*PAAS > 1.8) [84]. Pyrites in BIF ores exhibit Δ33S values of −0.08‰ to +1.03‰, suggesting a depositional environment distant from submarine volcanic centers [27,85] or low atmospheric oxygen levels due to the absence of an ozonosphere, which is consistent with those of Siderian Lake Superior-type BIFs. Furthermore, the age of the Huoqiu BIFs was no earlier than 2343 Ma, coinciding with the global peak age of Lake Superior-type BIF deposition [84]. Hence, we conclude that the Huoqiu BIF belongs to the Lake Superior type.
The Huoqiu BIF contains abundant specularite, which is the product of recrystallized hematite [23], indicating an oxidizing depositional environment. The BIF ores show LREE depletion with (La/Yb)SN ranging from 0.20 to 0.36 [86], implying a weakly oxidizing environment [87]. In the Lilaozhuang deposit, magnesite associated with BIF shows a markedly negative δ13Ccarb anomaly, reaching as low as −10.66‰ [88], indicating substantial incorporation of organic matter during carbonate formation. This reflects significant biological activity and photosynthesis. Enhanced photosynthesis would have promoted the oxidation of Fe2+ to Fe3+, and Fe3+, in turn, oxidized organic matter to CO32− via dissimilatory iron reduction (DIR), leading to the formation of Fe-rich carbonate minerals [89]. The average δ56Fe value of the iron ores is +0.59‰ [31,35], supporting the partial oxidation and precipitation of Fe2+. These isotopic proxies suggest that BIF deposition occurred during the hydrosphere oxidation stage of the two-stage oxygenation model of the Great Oxidation Event (GOE), when the hydrosphere began to oxidize while the atmosphere remained anoxic [90,91]. During this stage, large amounts of dissolved Fe2+ were transported to shallow marine or coastal environments, where they were oxidized by oxygen released by photosynthetic organisms and precipitated as Fe3+, forming large-scale BIF deposits in the Huoqiu Terrane.
In conclusion, the Huoqiu BIF was deposited during the hydrosphere oxidation stage of the GOE, coinciding with the peak period of the Lake Superior-type BIF deposition. BIF-bearing sequences are characterized by clastic and carbonate rocks deposited in a continental margin setting, an ideal environment for the development of Lake Superior-type BIFs. Therefore, the Huoqiu BIFs are classified as Lake Superior-type and have potential for further iron exploration in the southern NCC.

5. Conclusions

The Early Precambrian crystalline basement of the Huoqiu Terrane has long been regarded as the Archean Huoqiu Group, which is subdivided upwardly into the Huayuan, Wuji, and Zhouji formations. This study proposes that the crystalline basement of the Huoqiu Terrane should be divided into two parts: the Huayuan Gneiss Complex and the Huoqiu Group.
The Huayuan Gneiss Complex is composed mainly of TTG gneiss, gneissic diorite, gneissic granite, and strongly migmatized gneiss with weak stratifications. As indicated by the zircon U-Pb ages, it was mainly formed during two significant tectono-magmatic events at ~2.9 Ga and ~2.7 Ga.
The new Huoqiu Group includes the Wuji and Zhouji formations, which consist of biotite-plagioclase gneiss, carbonate, quartz schist, and magnetite quartzite. It is rich in BIF-type iron and magnesite deposits and exhibits low amphibolite facies metamorphism. Zircon U-Pb data show that the Huoqiu Group deposited no earlier than 2343 Ma, but was intruded by granite at 1916 Ma.
Zircon U-Pb ages and Hf isotope data suggest that the Huoqiu Terrane underwent two significant crustal growth events at around 2.9 Ga and 2.7 Ga, with the second event involving increased recycling of older crustal materials. Compared with the NCC, the 2.55 Ga crustal growth and tectono-thermal event in the Huoqiu Terrane were relatively weak, which highlights its unique nature.
Huoqiu BIFs were formed in a shallow marine continental margin during the early Paleoproterozoic. The development of thick carbonate rocks, sedimentary rhythms, and rhythmic structures suggests that the Huoqiu BIF belongs to the Lake Superior type. The positive δ56Fe values and negative δ13Ccarb ratios indicate that the BIFs formed during the early hydrospheric oxidation stage of the GOE. The Huoqiu Terrane and its adjacent areas are potentially suitable for the exploration of BIF-type iron deposits.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/min15070695/s1, Table S1: Zircon U-Pb data of para-metamorphic rocks from the Huoqiu Terrane; Table S2: Zircon U-Pb data of ortho-metamorphic rocks from the Huoqiu Terrane; Table S3: Zircon U-Pb data of TTG gneisses and granites from the Huoqiu Terrane; Table S4: Zircon Hf isotopic compositions of the Huoqiu Terrane; Table S5: Zircon Lu-Hf isotopic data of the Huoqiu Terrane.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.X., R.T., X.C., J.C. and Y.C.; investigation, methodology, L.X., R.T. and Y.C.; methodology, L.X., R.T. and Y.C.; writing—original draft preparation, L.X. and Y.C.; writing—review and editing, L.X. and Y.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of this manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. U2244206, U1906207) and the Uyghur Autonomous Region Tianchi Talent Project.

Data Availability Statement

All data generated or analyzed in this study are included in the main text and Supplementary Materials.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Shen Han, Xiaoyu Jia, and Yonggang Bai for their discussions. The valuable comments and suggestions from the reviewers considerably improved this manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. James, H.L. Sedimentary facies of iron-formation. Econ. Geol. 1954, 49, 235–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. James, H.L. Distribution of banded iron-formation in space and time. In Developments in Precambrian Geology; Trendall, A.F., Morris, R.C., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1983; pp. 471–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Bekker, A.; Slack, J.F.; Planavsky, N.; Krapez, B.; Hofmann, A.; Konhauser, K.O.; Rouxel, O.J. Iron formation: The sedimentary product of a complex interplay among mantle, tectonic, oceanic, and biospheric processes. Econ. Geol. 2010, 105, 467–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Zhu, X.Q.; Tang, H.S.; Sun, X.H. Genesis of banded iron formations: A series of experimental simulations. Ore Geol. Rev. 2014, 63, 465–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bekker, A.; Krapež, B.; Slack, J.F.; Planavsky, N.; Hofmann, A.; Konhauser, K.O.; Rouxel, O.J. Iron formation: The sedimentary product of a complex interplay among mantle, tectonic, oceanic, and biospheric processes—A reply. Econ. Geol. 2012, 107, 379–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Hoffman, P.F.; Kaufman, A.J.; Halverson, G.P.; Schrag, D.P. A Neoproterozoic snowball earth. Science 1998, 281, 1342–1346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Liu, D.Y.; Nutman, A.P.; Compston, W.; Wu, J.S.; Shen, Q.H. Remnants of ≥3800 ma crust in the chinese part of the sino-korean craton. Geology 1992, 20, 339–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Liu, D.Y.; Wan, Y.S.; Wu, J.S.; Wilde, S.A.; Zhou, H.Y.; Dong, C.Y.; Yin, X.Y. Eoarchean rocks and zircons in the North China Craton. Dev. Precambrian Geol. 2007, 15, 251–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Liu, D.Y.; Wilde, S.A.; Wan, Y.S.; Wu, J.S.; Zhou, H.Y.; Dong, C.Y.; Yin, X.Y. New U-Pb and Hf isotopic data confirm Anshan as the oldest preserved segment of the North China Craton. Am. J. Sci. 2008, 308, 200–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Qi, N.; Zhou, Z.J.; Zou, H.B.; Chen, Y.J. 3.85 Ga continental crust beneath the southern North China Craton: Evidence from zircon xenocrysts in Cretaceous granites. Gondwana Res. 2021, 91, 277–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Song, B.; Nutman, A.P.; Liu, D.Y.; Wu, J.S. 3800 to 2500 Ma crustal evolution in the Anshan area of Liaoning Province, northeastern China. Precambrian Res. 1996, 78, 79–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wan, Y.S.; Liu, D.Y.; Song, B.; Wu, J.S.; Yang, C.H.; Zhang, Z.Q.; Geng, Y.S. Geochemical and Nd isotopic compositions of 3.8 Ga meta-quartz dioritic and trondhjemitic rocks from the Anshan area and their geological significance. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2005, 24, 563–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Wan, Y.S.; Liu, D.Y.; Nutman, A.; Zhou, H.Y.; Dong, C.Y.; Yin, X.Y.; Ma, M.Z. Multiple 3.8–3.1 Ga tectono-magmatic events in a newly discovered area of ancient rocks (the Shengousi Complex), Anshan, North China Craton. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2012, 54, 18–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Zhai, M.G. Multi-stage crustal growth and cratonization of the North China Craton. Geosci. Front. 2014, 5, 457–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zhai, M.G.; Santosh, M. The Early Precambrian odyssey of the North China Craton: A synoptic overview. Gondwana Res. 2011, 20, 6–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Zhai, M.G.; Santosh, M. Metallogeny of the North China Craton: Link with secular changes in the evolving Earth. Gondwana Res. 2013, 24, 275–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Wang, A.; Liu, Y. Neoarchean (2.5–2.8 Ga) crustal growth of the North China Craton revealed by zircon Hf isotope: A synthesis. Geosci. Front. 2012, 3, 147–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zhao, G.C.; Sun, M.; Wilde, S.A.; Li, S.Z. Late Archean to Paleoproterozoic evolution of the North China Craton: Key issues revisited. Precambrian Res. 2005, 136, 177–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Wan, Y.S.; Liu, D.Y.; Dong, C.Y.; Xie, H.Q.; Kröner, A.; Ma, M.Z.; Liu, S.J.; Xie, S.W.; Ren, P. Formation and evolution of archean continental crust of the North China Craton. In Precambrian Geology of China; Zhai, M.G., Ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, German, 2015; pp. 59–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Diwu, C.R.; Zhang, C.L.; Sun, Y. Archean continental crust in the southern north China Craton. In Main Tectonic Events and Metallogeny of the North China Craton; Zhai, M.G., Zhao, Y., Zhao, T.P., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2016; pp. 29–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lan, C.Y.; Yang, A.Y.; Wang, C.L.; Zhao, T.P. Geochemistry, U-Pb zircon geochronology and Sm-Nd isotopes of the Xincai banded iron formation in the southern margin of the North China Craton: Implications on Neoarchean seawater compositions and solute sources. Precambrian Res. 2019, 326, 240–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. No. 313 Geological Team. A final report of the Huoqiu iron ore field. Anhui Bur. Geol. Miner. Resour. 1995, 2, 1–120. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  23. Yang, X.Y.; Liu, L.; Lee, I.; Wang, B.H.; Du, Z.B.; Wang, Q.C.; Wang, Y.X.; Sun, W.D. A review on the Huoqiu banded iron formation (BIF), southeast margin of the North China Craton: Genesis of iron deposits and implications for exploration. Ore Geol. Rev. 2014, 63, 418–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Du, Z.B.; Yang, X.Y. The study of metallogenesis of the sedimentary metamorphic iron deposit in the Huoqiu region, west Anhui. Geotecton. Metallog. Sin. 1994, 18, 235–236. [Google Scholar]
  25. Huang, H. The Mineralizing Age, Forming Environment and Genesis of Hnoqin BIF Ironstone in Southern Margin of the North China Craton. Ph.D. Thesis, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, China, 2014. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
  26. Wang, X.; Ma, C.Q.; Deng, J.L. Zircon U-Pb ages of metamorphic volcanic interlayer in the BIF type iron ore at the southeastern margin of the North China Craton and their constraints on the formation time of iron ore. Chin. J. Geol. 2021, 56, 951–971. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hou, K.J. Formation Mechanism of Different Types of Banded Iron Formations of China: Constraints from Iron, Silicon, Oxygen and Sulfur Isotopes. Ph.D. Thesis, China University of Geosciences Beijing, Beijing, China, 2012. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
  28. Liu, L.; Yang, X.Y. Temporal, environmental and tectonic significance of the Huoqiu BIF, southeastern North China Craton: Geochemical and geochronological constraints. Precambrian Res. 2015, 261, 217–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sang, B.L.; Xing, F.M.; Chen, Y.Z. Geological Characteristics and Exploration Directions of Precambrian Metamorphic Iron Deposits, Anhui Province; The Institute of Geological Survey of Anhui Province: Hefei, China, 1981. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  30. Liu, L.; Yang, X.Y.; Santosh, M.; Zhao, G.C.; Aulbach, S. U-Pb age and Hf isotopes of detrital zircons from the Southeastern North China Craton: Meso-to Neoarchean episodic crustal growth in a shifting tectonic regime. Gondwana Res. 2016, 35, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hou, K.J.; Ma, X.D.; Li, Y.H.; Liu, F.; Han, D. Chronology, geochemical, Si and Fe isotopic constraints on the origin of Huoqiu banded iron formation (BIF), southeastern margin of the North China Craton. Precambrian Res. 2017, 298, 351–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Wan, Y.S.; Dong, C.Y.; Wang, W.; Xie, H.Q.; Liu, D.Y. Archean basement and a Paleoproterozoic collision orogen in the Huoqiu area at the southeastern margin of North China Craton: Evidence from sensitive high resolution ion micro-probe U-Pb zircon geochronology. Acta. Geol. Sin-Engl. 2010, 84, 91–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wang, Q.Y.; Zheng, J.P.; Pan, Y.M.; Dong, Y.J.; Liao, F.X.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, L.; Zhao, G.; Tu, Z.B. Archean crustal evolution in the southeastern North China Craton: New data from the Huoqiu Complex. Precambrian Res. 2014, 255, 294–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Lu, J.S.; Zhai, M.G.; Kong, X.; Long, X.P.; Feng, Q. Clockwise P-T-t path for Paleoproterozoic metamorphism in the Huoqiu metamorphic complex of the southeastern North China craton. Lithos 2021, 386–387, 106014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Pickard, A.L. SHRIMP U–Pb zircon ages of tuffaceous mudrocks in the Brockman Iron Formation of the Hamersley Range, Western Australia. Aust. J. Earth Sci. 2002, 49, 491–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Wilson, J.F.; Nesbitt, R.W.; Fanning, C.M. Zircon geochronology of Archaean felsic sequences in the Zimbabwe craton: A revision of greenstone stratigraphy and a model for crustal growth. Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ. 1995, 95, 109–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Davis, D.W. U–Pb geochronology of Archean metasedimentary rocks in the Pontiac and Abitibi subprovinces, Quebec, constraints on timing, provenance and regional tectonics. Precambrian Res. 2002, 115, 97–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Tera, F.; Wasserburg, G.J. U-Th-Pb systematics in three Apollo 14 basalts and the problem of initial Pb in lunar rocks. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1972, 14, 281–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Schoene, B. U-Th-Pb geochronology. In Treatise on Geochemistry, 2nd ed.; Holland, H.D., Turekian, K.K., Eds.; Elsevier: Oxford, UK, 2014; pp. 341–378. [Google Scholar]
  40. Puetz, S.J.; Spencer, C.J.; Ganade, C.E. Analyses from a validated global U-Pb detrital zircon database: Enhanced methods for filtering discordant U-Pb zircon analyses and optimizing crystallization age estimates. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2021, 220, 103745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Pereira, M.F.; Gama, C. Revisiting the intermediate sediment repository concept applied to the provenance of Zircon. Minerals 2021, 11, 233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Albarède, F.; Scherer, E.E.; Blichert-Toft, J.; Rosing, M.; Simionovici, A.; Bizzarro, M. γ-ray irradiation in the early Solar System and the conundrum of the 176Lu decay constant. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2006, 70, 1261–1270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Blichert-Toft, J.; Albarède, F. The Lu-Hf isotope geochemistry of chondrites and the evolution of the mantle-crust system. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1997, 148, 243–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Vervoort, J.D.; Blichert-Toft, J. Evolution of the depleted mantle: Hf isotope evidence from juvenile rocks through time. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1999, 63, 533–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Rudnick, R.; Gao, S. Composition of the continental crust. In Treatise on Geochemistry, 3rd ed.; Holland, H.D., Turekian, K.K., Eds.; Elsevier-Pergamon: Oxford, UK, 2003; pp. 1–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Liu, L.; Yang, X.Y.; Santosh, M.; Aulbach, S. Neoarchean to Paleoproterozoic continental growth in the southeastern margin of the North China Craton: Geochemical, zircon U-Pb and Hf isotope evidence from the Huoqiu complex. Gondwana Res. 2015, 28, 1002–1018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Nie, F.; Zhang, Z.B.; Shi, Y.H.; Wang, J.; Tang, P.; Ren, G.X. Comparison study of typical rocks separated from Feidong Group and Huoqiu Group in the Tan-Lu Fault zone (Anhui segment). Acta Petrol. Sin. 2016, 32, 1087–1100. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  48. Sun, G.Z.; Liu, S.W.; Cawood, P.A.; Tang, M.; van Hunen, J.; Gao, L.; Hu, Y.L.; Hu, F.Y. Thermal state and evolving geodynamic regimes of the Meso-to Neoarchean North China Craton. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Yang, D.B.; Xu, W.L.; Xu, Y.G.; Wang, Q.H.; Pei, F.P.; Wang, F. U–Pb ages and Hf isotope data from detrital zircons in the Neoproterozoic sandstones of northern Jiangsu and southern Liaoning Provinces, China: Implications for the Late Precambrian evolution of the southeastern North China Craton. Precambrian Res. 2012, 216, 162–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Wan, Y.S.; Dong, C.Y.; Wang, S.J.; Kröner, A.; Xie, H.Q.; Ma, M.Z.; Liu, D.Y. Middle Neoarchean magmatism in western Shandong, North China Craton: SHRIMP zircon dating and LA-ICP-MS Hf isotope analysis. Precambrian Res. 2014, 255, 865–884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Wan, Y.S.; Liu, D.Y.; Xie, H.Q.; Kröner, A.; Ren, P.; Liu, S.J.; Ma, M.Z. Formation ages and environments of Early Precambrian banded iron formation in the North China Craton. In Main Tectonic Events and Metallogeny of the North China Craton; Zhai, M.G., Zhao, Y., Zhao, T.P., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2016; pp. 65–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Diwu, C.R.; Sun, Y.; Gao, J.F.; Fan, L.G. Early Precambrian tectonothermal events of the North China Craton: Constraints from in situ detrital zircon U-Pb, Hf and O isotopic compositions in Tietonggou Formation. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2013, 58, 3760–3770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Wang, H.L.; Chen, L.; Sun, Y.; Liu, X.M.; Xu, X.Y.; Chen, J.L.; Zhang, H.; Diwu, C.R. ~4.1Ga xenocrystal zircon from Ordovician volcanic rocks in western part of North Qinling Orogenic Belt. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2007, 52, 1685–1693. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Diwu, C.R.; Sun, Y.; Wilde, S.A.; Wang, H.L.; Dong, Z.C.; Zhang, H.; Wang, Q. New evidence for ~4.45 Ga terrestrial crust from zircon xenocrysts in Ordovician ignimbrite in the North Qinling Orogenic Belt, China. Gondwana Res. 2013, 23, 1484–1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Zheng, J.P.; Griffin, W.L.; O’Reilly, S.Y.; Lu, F.X.; Wang, C.Y.; Zhang, M.; Wang, F.Z.; Li, H.M. 3.6 Ga lower crust in central China: New evidence on the assembly of the North China Craton. Geology 2004, 32, 229–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Diwu, C.R.; Wang, T.Y.; Yan, J.H. New evidence for Neoarchean (2.7 Ga) crustal growth in the North China Craton. Precambrian Res. 2020, 350, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Chen, Y.J.; Fu, S.G.; Hu, S.X.; Chen, Z.M.; Zhou, S.Z.; Lin, Q.Y.; Fu, G.H. The Shipaihe Movement and the disassembly of ‘DengFeng Group’. J. Stratigr. 1989, 13, 81–87. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  58. Sun, D.Z.; Li, H.M.; Lin, Y.X.; Zhou, H.F.; Zhao, F.Q.; Tang, M. Precambrian geochronology, chronotectonic framework and model of chronocrustal structure of the Zhongtiao Mountains. Acta. Geol. Sin-Engl. 1991, 65, 216–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Chen, Y.J.; Zhao, Y.C. Geochemical characteristics and evolution of REE in the Early Precambrian sediments: Evidences from the southern margin of the North China craton. Episodes 1997, 20, 109–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Griffin, W.L.; Belousova, E.; Begg, G.; O’Reilly, S. Growth of Continental Crust from the Archean to Now. In International Discussion Meeting on Continental Geology and Tectonics. Ph.D. Thesis, Northwest University, Xi’an, China, 6–12 September 2009. [Google Scholar]
  61. Belousova, E.A.; Kostitsyn, Y.A.; Griffin, W.L.; Begg, G.C.; O’reilly, S.Y.; Pearson, N.J. The growth of the continental crust: Constraints from zircon Hf-isotope data. Lithos 2010, 119, 457–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Arndt, N.T.; Goldstein, S.L. Use and abuse of crust-formation ages. Geology 1987, 15, 893–895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Ortega-Obregón, C.; Solari, L.; Gómez-Tuena, A.; Elías-Herrera, M.; Ortega-Gutiérrez, F.; Macías-Romo, C. Permian-Carboniferous arc magmatism in southern Mexico: U-Pb dating, trace element and Hf isotopic evidence on zircons of earliest subduction beneath the western margin of Gondwana. Int. J. Earth Sci. 2014, 103, 1287–1300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Liu, Y.G.; Lü, X.B.; Wu, C.M.; Hu, X.G.; Duan, Z.P.; Deng, G.; Wang, H.; Zhu, X.; Zeng, H.D.; Wang, P.; et al. The migration of Tarim plume magma toward the northeast in Early Permian and its significance for the exploration of PGE-Cu-Ni magmatic sulfide deposits in Xinjiang, NW China: As suggested by Sr-Nd-Hf isotopes, sedimentology and geophysical data. Ore Geol. Rev. 2016, 72, 538–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Wan, Y.S.; Dong, C.Y.; Ren, P.; Bai, W.Q.; Xie, H.Q.; Liu, S.J.; Xie, S.W.; Liu, D.Y. Spatial and temporal distribution, compositional characteristics and formation and evolution of Archean TTG rocks in the North China Craton: A synthesis. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2017, 33, 1405–1419. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  66. Condie, K.C. Episodic continental growth models: After thoughts and extensions. Tectonophysics 2000, 322, 153–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Condie, K.C.; Belousova, E.A.; Griffin, W.L.; Sircombe, K.N. Granitoid events in space and time: Constraints from igneous and detrital zircon age spectra. Gondwana Res. 2009, 15, 228–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Guan, H.; Sun, M.; Wilde, S.A.; Zhou, X.H.; Zhai, M.G. SHRIMP U-Pb zircon geochronology of the Fuping Complex: Implications for formation and assembly of the North China Craton. Precambrian Res. 2002, 113, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Faure, M.; Trap, P.; Lin, W.; Monié, P.; Bruguier, O. Polyorogenic evolution of the Paleoproterozoic Trans-North China Belt—New insights from the Lüliangshan-Hengshan-Wutaishan and Fuping massifs. Episodes J. Int. Geosci. 2007, 30, 95–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Tang, J.; Zheng, Y.F.; Wu, Y.B.; Gong, B.; Liu, X.M. Geochronology and geochemistry of metamorphic rocks in the Jiaobei terrane: Constraints on its tectonic affinity in the Sulu orogen. Precambrian Res. 2007, 152, 48–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Jahn, B.M.; Liu, D.Y.; Wan, Y.S.; Song, B.; Wu, J.S. Archean crustal evolution of the Jiaodong Peninsula, China, as revealed by zircon SHRIMP geochronology, elemental and Nd-isotope geochemistry. Am. J. Sci. 2008, 308, 232–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Wan, Y.S.; Liu, D.Y.; Wang, W.; Song, T.R.; Kröner, A.; Dong, C.Y.; Yin, X.Y. Provenance of Meso-to Neoproterozoic cover sediments at the Ming Tombs, Beijing, North China Craton: An integrated study of U-Pb dating and Hf isotopic measurement of detrital zircons and whole-rock geochemistry. Gondwana Res. 2011, 20, 219–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Dong, X.J.; Xu, Z.Y.; Liu, Z.H.; Sha, Q. Zircon U-Pb geochronology of Archean high-grade metamorphic rocks from Xi Ulanbulang area, central Inner Mongolia. Sci. China Earth Sci. 2012, 55, 204–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Han, B.F.; Xu, Z.; Ren, R.; Li, L.L.; Yang, J.H.; Yang, Y.H. Crustal growth and intracrustal recycling in the middle segment of the Trans-North China Orogen, North China Craton: A case study of the Fuping Complex. Geol. Mag. 2012, 149, 729–742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Yang, C.H.; Du, L.L.; Ren, L.D.; Song, H.X.; Wan, Y.S.; Xie, H.Q.; Geng, Y.S. Delineation of the ca. 2.7 Ga TTG gneisses in the Zanhuang Complex, North China Craton and its geological implications. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2013, 72, 178–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Xie, S.W.; Xie, H.Q.; Wang, S.J.; Kröner, A.; Liu, S.J.; Zhou, H.Y.; Ma, M.Z.; Dong, C.Y.; Liu, D.Y.; Wan, Y.S. Ca. 2.9 Ga granitoid magmatism in eastern Shandong, North China Craton: Zircon dating, Hf-in-zircon isotopic analysis and whole-rock geochemistry. Precambrian Res. 2014, 255, 538–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Zhou, Y.Y.; Zhao, T.P.; Zhai, M.G.; Gao, J.F.; Sun, Q.Y. Petrogenesis of the Archean tonalite-trondhjemite-granodiorite (TTG) and granites in the Lushan area, southern margin of the North China Craton: Implications for crustal accretion and transformation. Precambrian Res. 2014, 255, 514–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Guo, B.R.; Liu, S.W.; Zhang, J.; Yan, M. Zircon U-Pb-Hf isotope systematics and geochemistry of Helong granite-greenstone belt in Southern Jilin Province, China: Implications for Neoarchean crustal evolution of the northeastern margin of North China Craton. Precambrian Res. 2015, 271, 254–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Wu, M.L.; Lin, S.F.; Wan, Y.S.; Gao, J.F.; Stern, R.A. Episodic Archean crustal accretion in the North China Craton: Insights from integrated zircon U-Pb-Hf-O isotopes of the Southern Jilin Complex, northeast China. Precambrian Res. 2021, 358, 106–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Bao, H.; Liu, S.W.; Wan, Y.S.; Wang, M.J.; Sun, G.Z.; Gao, L.; Wang, W.; Guo, R.R.; Fu, J.H. Neoarchean granitoids and tectonic regime of lateral growth in northeastern North China Craton. Gondwana Res. 2022, 107, 176–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Chen, Y.J.; Pirajno, F.; Li, N.; Deng, X.H.; Yang, Y.F. Geology and Geochemistry of Molybdenum Deposits in the Qinling Orogen, P R China; Springer: Singapore, 2022; pp. 1–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Zhao, G.C.; Wilde, S.A.; Cawood, P.A.; Sun, M. Archean blocks and their boundaries in the North China Craton: Lithological, geochemical, structural and P-T path constraints and tectonic evolution. Precambrian Res. 2001, 107, 45–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Huston, D.L.; Logan, G.A. Barite, BIFs and bugs: Evidence for the evolution of the Earth’s early hydrosphere. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2004, 220, 41–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Liu, L.; Yang, X.Y. Geochemical characteristics of the Huoqiu BIF ore deposit in Anhui Province and their metallogenic significance: Taking the Bantaizi and Zhouyoufang deposits as examples. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2013, 29, 2551–2566. [Google Scholar]
  85. Hou, K.J.; Ma, X.D.; Li, Y.H.; Liu, F.; Han, D. Genesis of Huoqiu banded iron formation (BIF), southeastern North China Craton, constraints from geochemical and Hf-OS isotopic characteristics. J. Geochem. Explor. 2019, 197, 60–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Huang, H.; Zhang, L.C.; Liu, X.F.; Li, H.Z.; Liu, L. Geological and geochemical characteristics of the Lee Laozhuang iron mine in Huoqiu iron deposit: Implications for sedimentary environment. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2013, 29, 2593–2605. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  87. Tang, H.S.; Chen, Y.J.; Santosh, M.; Zhong, H.; Yang, T. REE geochemistry of carbonates from the Guanmenshan Formation, Liaohe Group, NE Sino-Korean Craton: Implications for seawater compositional change during the Great Oxidation Event. Precambrian Res. 2013, 227, 316–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Huang, H.; Zhang, L.C. Genesis of the Lilaozhuang Iron-Magnesite deposit in the Huoqiu Area of Anhui Province: Indicative significance of Carbon and Oxygen isotopes. Bull. Mineral., Petrol. Geochem. 2020, 39, 1312–1324. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Wang, C.L.; Zhai, M.G.; Robbins, L.J.; Peng, Z.D.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, L.C. Late Archean shelf-to-basin iron shuttle contributes to the formation of the world-class Dataigou banded iron formation. Econ. Geol. 2024, 119, 725–736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Tang, H.S.; Chen, Y.J. Global glaciations and atmospheric change at ca. 2.3 Ga. Geosci. Front. 2013, 4, 583–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Chen, Y.J.; Tang, H.S. The Great Oxidation Event and Its Records in North China Craton. In Main Tectonic Events and Metallogeny of the North China Craton; Zhai, M.G., Zhao, Y., Zhao, T.P., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2016; pp. 218–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Minerals 15 00695 g001
Figure 1. Distribution of Early Precambrian metamorphic terranes in the North China Craton (modified after [18]). Abbreviations in figure are: AL = Alashan, CD = Chengde, DF = Dengfeng, EH = Eastern Hebei, ES = Eastern Shandong, FP = Fuping, GY = Guyang, HA = Huai’an, HL = Helanshan, HQ = Huoqiu, HS = Hengshan, JN = Jining, JP = Jianping, LG = Langrim, LL = Lvliang, MY = Miyun, NH = Northern Hebei, NL = Northern Liaoning, QL = Qianlishan, SJ = Southern Jilin, SL = Southern Liaoning, TH = Taihua, WD = Wulashan, Daqingshan, WL = Western Liaoning, WS = Western Shandong, WT = Wutai, XH = Xuanhua, ZH = Zanhuang, and ZT = Zhongtiaoshan.
Figure 1. Distribution of Early Precambrian metamorphic terranes in the North China Craton (modified after [18]). Abbreviations in figure are: AL = Alashan, CD = Chengde, DF = Dengfeng, EH = Eastern Hebei, ES = Eastern Shandong, FP = Fuping, GY = Guyang, HA = Huai’an, HL = Helanshan, HQ = Huoqiu, HS = Hengshan, JN = Jining, JP = Jianping, LG = Langrim, LL = Lvliang, MY = Miyun, NH = Northern Hebei, NL = Northern Liaoning, QL = Qianlishan, SJ = Southern Jilin, SL = Southern Liaoning, TH = Taihua, WD = Wulashan, Daqingshan, WL = Western Liaoning, WS = Western Shandong, WT = Wutai, XH = Xuanhua, ZH = Zanhuang, and ZT = Zhongtiaoshan.
Minerals 15 00695 g001
Minerals 15 00695 g002
Figure 2. Geological map of the Huoqiu Terrane (base map modified after [33]).
Figure 2. Geological map of the Huoqiu Terrane (base map modified after [33]).
Minerals 15 00695 g002
Minerals 15 00695 g003
Figure 3. Stratigraphic column of the Huoqiu Group (modified after [28]), showing sample locations for zircon dating.
Figure 3. Stratigraphic column of the Huoqiu Group (modified after [28]), showing sample locations for zircon dating.
Minerals 15 00695 g003
Minerals 15 00695 g004
Figure 4. (a) Zircon 207Pb/206Pb age histogram of the Wuji Formation. (b) Zircon 207Pb/206Pb age histogram of the Zhouji Formation. (Data and references in Supplementary Table S1). (c) Detrital zircon cathodoluminescence (CL) images for sample LY105.461 (Images from [30]).
Figure 4. (a) Zircon 207Pb/206Pb age histogram of the Wuji Formation. (b) Zircon 207Pb/206Pb age histogram of the Zhouji Formation. (Data and references in Supplementary Table S1). (c) Detrital zircon cathodoluminescence (CL) images for sample LY105.461 (Images from [30]).
Minerals 15 00695 g004
Minerals 15 00695 g005
Figure 5. Zircon 207Pb/206Pb age histogram of TTG gneiss, granite, and meta-volcanic rocks in the Huoqiu Terrane (data from references in Supplementary Tables S2 and S3).
Figure 5. Zircon 207Pb/206Pb age histogram of TTG gneiss, granite, and meta-volcanic rocks in the Huoqiu Terrane (data from references in Supplementary Tables S2 and S3).
Minerals 15 00695 g005
Minerals 15 00695 g006
Figure 6. 207Pb/206Pb age versus εHf(t) of the zircons in the Huoqiu Terrane (data from references [23,30,31,33,46,50]).
Figure 6. 207Pb/206Pb age versus εHf(t) of the zircons in the Huoqiu Terrane (data from references [23,30,31,33,46,50]).
Minerals 15 00695 g006
Minerals 15 00695 g007
Figure 7. Histogram of two-stage Hf model ages in the Huoqiu Terrane (data from references [22,29,30,33,46,50]).
Figure 7. Histogram of two-stage Hf model ages in the Huoqiu Terrane (data from references [22,29,30,33,46,50]).
Minerals 15 00695 g007
Table 1. Different types of zircon 207Pb/206Pb ages in the Huoqiu Group.
Table 1. Different types of zircon 207Pb/206Pb ages in the Huoqiu Group.
SampleFormationLithologyZircon TypeNumMethodMin Age (Ma)Max Age (Ma)Weight-Mean Age (Ma)Upper Intercept Age (Ma)Reference
Para-metamorphic rocks
ZYF1ZhoujiBIF oreDetrital6LA-MC-ICPMS2735 ± 132984 ± 13 2769 ± 16[28]
ZYF9ZhoujiBIF oreDetrital5LA-MC-ICPMS2752 ± 92779 ± 9 2756 ± 18[28]
Detrital3LA-MC-ICPMS2930 ± 112965 ± 9 2961 ± 23[28]
ZY11-3-9ZhoujiBiotite gneissDetrital5LA-ICPMS2989 ± 63137 ± 3 3015 ± 34[31]
Detrital10LA-ICPMS2747 ± 42822 ± 2 2760 ± 12[31]
Detrital4LA-ICPMS2500 ± 72561 ± 4 2546 ± 12[31]
Metamorphic1LA-ICPMS1898 ± 9 1885 ± 17[31]
ZK26-3ZhoujiActinolite gneissDetrital27LA-ICPMS2735 ± 182867 ± 172765 ± 142772 ± 9[33]
Detrital1LA-ICPMS2939 ± 21 [33]
BT3.406ZhoujiBiotite paragneissDetrital24LA-MC-ICPMS2690 ± 113058 ± 10 [30]
CLWujiGranulititeDetrital16Cameca U-Pb 2687 ± 62991 ± 9 2770 ± 16[25]
ZK221.1WujiBIF oreDetrital14LA-MC-ICPMS2716 ± 122783 ± 132750 ± 14 [28]
Detrital4LA-MC-ICPMS2982 ± 113169 ± 13 [28]
HQ0710Wujitwo-mica feldspar quartziteDetrital10SHRIMP2964 ± 173026 ± 103011 ± 14 [32]
Detrital6SHRIMP2693 ± 92779 ± 142765 ± 15 [32]
HQ0711WujiBiotite-hornblende-garnet gneissDetrital9SHRIMP2950 ± 183017 ± 92982 ± 18 [32]
Detrital6SHRIMP2706 ± 162764 ± 132739 ± 18 [32]
HQ0719WujiGarnet-hornblende-biotite gneissDetrital5SHRIMP2977 ± 123026 ± 93002 ± 24 [32]
Detrital8SHRIMP2706 ± 192782 ± 122765 ± 10 [32]
ZK26-1 Garnet-biotite gneissDetrital2LA-ICPMS2862 ± 262903 ± 392875 ± 44 [33]
Detrital6LA-ICPMS2720 ± 422810 ± 282765 ± 24 [33]
Detrital24LA-ICPMS2939 ± 313055 ± 303019 ± 123023 ± 12[33]
LY105.461Wujibiotite gneissDetrital25LA-MC-ICPMS2343 ± 103997 ± 8 [30]
ZZ221.8WujiBiotite-quartz gneissDetrital26LA-MC-ICPMS2553 ± 122948 ± 18 [30]
WS070-1WujiBiotite gneissDetrital0LA-ICPMS 3190 ± 99[47]
Detrital13LA-ICPMS2536 ± 752879 ± 332736 ± 532784 ± 45[47]
Ortho-metamorphic rocks
ZJZhoujiPlagioclase amphiboliteMagmatic2Cameca2698 ± 102740 ± 9 2728 ± 45[25]
ZK2512-2ZhoujiHornblende gneissMagmatic43LA-ICPMS2684 ± 342867 ± 32 2750 ± 15[26]
ZK2918-1ZhoujiBiotite gneissMagmatic73LA-ICPMS2680 ± 272850 ± 30 2740 ± 7[26]
Inherited3LA-ICPMS2916 ± 463181 ± 40 [26]
313ZX84-3WujiMagnetite amphiboliteMagmatic8LA-ICPMS2895 ± 1193065 ± 1222946 ± 41 [23]
ZX84-3WujiMagnetite amphiboliteMagmatic11LA-ICPMS2947 ± 123039 ± 133012 ± 21 [46]
ZK122-1WujiAmphiboliteMagmatic18LA-MC-ICPMS2762 ± 113023 ± 162966 ± 32 [46]
WS069-1WujiMagnetite garnet-bearing amphiboliteMagmatic12LA-ICPMS2621 ± 332828 ± 32 2797 ± 64[46]
Inherited2LA-ICPMS2955 ± 393021 ± 40 [47]
Intrusive rocks
313ZX44-9ZhoujiGraniteMagmatic14LA-ICPMS 1820 ± 130[23]
313ZX44-11ZhoujiMigmatitic graniteMagmatic22LA-ICPMS 1897 ± 95[23]
ZX44-9ZhoujiGraniteMagmatic23LA-MC-ICPMS 1823 ± 41[46]
ZX44-11ZhoujiMigmatitic graniteMagmatic32LA-MC-ICPMS 1916 ± 42[46]
TTG gneisses
HQ0708 Gneissic tonaliteMagmatic17SHRIMP 2754 ± 13 [32]
Metamorphic5SHRIMP 1842 ± 17 [32]
HQ0704 Gneissic tonaliteMagmatic11SHRIMP 2564 ± 25 [32]
Inherited2SHRIMP 2697 ± 22 [32]
FJZK01-171 Augen potassic graniteMagmatic23LA-ICPMS 2699 ± 232708 ± 50[33]
Inherited7LA-ICPMS 3262 ± 35[33]
NZZK01-324 Migmatized syenograniteMagmatic30LA-ICPMS 2709 ± 21[33]
ZK3-511 TTG gneissMagmatic30LA-MC-ICPMS 2765 ± 11[46]
ZK34-40 TTG gneissMagmatic10LA-MC-ICPMS 2752 ± 24[46]
Metamorphic8LA-MC-ICPMS 2444 ± 29[46]
ZK122-2 TTG gneissMagmatic9LA-MC-ICPMS 2711 ± 25[46]
Inherited7LA-MC-ICPMS 2905 ± 23[46]
ZK122-3 TTG gneissMagmatic32LA-ICPMS 2914 ± 14[46]
18ABH01-1 Granodioritic gneissMagmatic25LA-ICPMS 2911 ± 11 [48]
18AHB02-1 Granodioritic gneissMagmatic26LA-ICPMS 2929 ± 6 [48]
18AHB02-3 Trondhjemitic gneissMagmatic25LA-ICPMS 2931 ± 5 [48]
Table 2. Characteristics of the four youngest detrital zircons in sample LY105.461 from the Wuji Formation.
Table 2. Characteristics of the four youngest detrital zircons in sample LY105.461 from the Wuji Formation.
SampleContent (ppm)Th/UIsotopic RatiosIsotopic Ages (Ma)Concordance
(%)
SpotPbU206Pb/238U1σ207Pb/235U1σ207Pb/206Pb1σ206Pb/238U1σ207Pb/235U1σ207Pb /206Pb1σ1σ
LY105.461
15961650.820.47000.00329.93310.08010.15330.0009248317242920238310104
17711250.530.48340.00399.98110.08690.14980.0009254220243321234310108
22641040.570.48610.003610.10090.12330.15070.0012255419244430235414108
3131620.270.41980.00298.90110.06310.15380.001022601623281723881195
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Xue, L.; Tang, R.; Chen, X.; Cao, J.; Chen, Y. The Formation Age and Geological Setting of the Huoqiu Group in the Southern Margin of North China Craton: Implication for BIF-Type Iron Prospecting Potentiality. Minerals 2025, 15, 695. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15070695

AMA Style

Xue L, Tang R, Chen X, Cao J, Chen Y. The Formation Age and Geological Setting of the Huoqiu Group in the Southern Margin of North China Craton: Implication for BIF-Type Iron Prospecting Potentiality. Minerals. 2025; 15(7):695. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15070695

Chicago/Turabian Style

Xue, Lizhi, Rongzhen Tang, Xinkai Chen, Jiashuo Cao, and Yanjing Chen. 2025. "The Formation Age and Geological Setting of the Huoqiu Group in the Southern Margin of North China Craton: Implication for BIF-Type Iron Prospecting Potentiality" Minerals 15, no. 7: 695. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15070695

APA Style

Xue, L., Tang, R., Chen, X., Cao, J., & Chen, Y. (2025). The Formation Age and Geological Setting of the Huoqiu Group in the Southern Margin of North China Craton: Implication for BIF-Type Iron Prospecting Potentiality. Minerals, 15(7), 695. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15070695

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop