Next Article in Journal
Ore Genesis Based on Microtextural and Geochemical Evidence from the Hydrothermal As–Sb Mineralization of the Matra Deposit (Alpine Corsica, France)
Previous Article in Journal
Earliest Cambrian Carbonate Platform Evolution, Environmental Change, and Organic Matter Accumulation in the Northwestern Yangtze Block, South China
 
 
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 8
10.3390/min15080813
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 Geochronology, Geochemical Characteristics, and Tectonic Settings of the Granites, Yexilinhundi, Southern Great Xing’an Range

by
Haixin Yue
1,2,
Henan Yu
1,2,*,
Zhenjun Sun
1,2,*,
Yanping He
1,2,
Mengfan Guan
1,2,
Yingbo Yu
3 and
Xi Chen
4
1
School of Earth Sciences, Institute of Disaster Prevention, Langfang 065201, China
2
Hebei Key Laboratory of Earthquake Dynamics, Langfang 065201, China
3
Cores and Samples Center of Natural Resources, China Geological Survey, Langfang 065201, China
4
No.1 Bureau of China Metallurgical Geology Bureau, Sanhe 065201, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Minerals 2025, 15(8), 813; https://doi.org/10.3390/min15080813
Submission received: 7 July 2025 / Revised: 26 July 2025 / Accepted: 29 July 2025 / Published: 31 July 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Mineral Geochemistry and Geochronology)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

The southern Great Xing’an Range is located in the overlap zone of the Paleo-Asian Ocean metallogenic domain and the Circum-Pacific metallogenic domain. It hosts numerous Sn-polymetallic deposits, such as Weilasituo, Bianjiadayuan, Huanggang, and Dajing, and witnessed multiple episodes of magmatism during the Late Mesozoic. The study area is situated within the Huanggangliang-Ganzhuermiao metallogenic belt in the southern Great Xing’an Range. The region has witnessed extensive magmatism, with Mesozoic magmatic activities being particularly closely linked to regional mineralization. We present petrographic, zircon U-Pb chronological, lithogeochemical, and Lu-Hf isotopic analyses of the Yexilinhundi granites. The results indicate that the granite porphyry and granodiorite were emplaced during the Late Jurassic. Both rocks exhibit high SiO2, K2O + Na2O, differentiation index (DI), and 10,000 Ga/Al ratios, coupled with low MgO contents. They show distinct fractionation between light and heavy rare earth elements (LREEs and HREEs), exhibit Eu anomalies, and have low whole-rock zircon saturation temperatures (Tzr), collectively demonstrating characteristics of highly fractionated I-type granites. The εHf(t) values of the granites range from 0.600 to 9.14, with young two-stage model ages (TDM2 = 616.0~1158 Ma), indicating that the magmatic source originated from partial melting of Mesoproterozoic-Neoproterozoic juvenile crust. This study proposes that the granites formed in a post-collisional/post-orogenic extensional setting associated with the subduction of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean, providing a scientific basis for understanding the relationship between the formation of Sn-polymetallic deposits and granitic magmatic evolution in the study area.

1. Introduction

The southern Great Xing’an Range (GXR) is located between the Siberian Craton and the North China Craton, with its northern boundary defined by the Erenhot-Hegenshan Fault, eastern boundary by the Nenjiang-Balihan Fault, and southern boundary by the Xar Moron Fault (Figure 1). By 2020, 26 Sn-dominated or Sn-associated deposits had been identified in this region [1], establishing it as a well-known Sn-polymetallic metallogenic cluster in northern China, colloquially referred to as the “Northern Nanling” [2,3]. The region witnessed geological tectonic evolution processes during the Phanerozoic Eon, including the closure of the Paleo-Asian Ocean, the closure of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean, and subduction of the Paleo-Pacific Ocean. The influence of multiple geological stresses has induced intense tectonic-magmatic activities in the region, which triggered large-scale polymetallic mineralization and resulted in the formation of numerous Sn-polymetallic deposits, such as the Weilasituo, Bianjiadayuan, Huanggang, and Dajing deposits [4,5,6,7]. Previous studies have shown that these deposits were predominantly formed during the Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous, and granitic magmatism also peaked in the same period, implying a close relationship between magmatic activities and regional mineralization during this interval [8,9].
The formation of Sn-polymetallic deposits is intimately associated with granites, making the petrological types and genetic mechanisms of these granites a hot topic in ore deposit geology research [10,11,12]. Based on the metallogenic settings and geochemical characteristics of different regions, scholars have proposed various genetic models. It is widely acknowledged that S-type granites are intimately associated with the formation of Sn-polymetallic deposits [13,14,15,16,17], but they do not represent the exclusive ore-forming genetic types; both I-type and A-type granites also exhibit significant metallogenic potential for Sn mineralization [18,19,20,21,22]. The southern GXR experienced multiple episodes of magmatism during the Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous, which predominantly formed A-type and I-type granites [12,23]. These rocks commonly exhibit geochemical characteristics of high silica (high SiO2), alkali-rich compositions (Na2O + K2O), and pronounced negative Eu anomalies. Integrated geophysical and geochemical analyses have demonstrated that granitic magmatism in this region serves as a key source for Sn-polymetallic mineralization [24,25,26]. However, a consensus on the types of ore-forming granites remains elusive [27,28].
Extensive research has been conducted on regional granites, with scholars proposing multiple tectono-magmatic evolutionary models based on geochronological and geochemical signatures [9,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38]. It is widely accepted that the magmatic dynamics are linked to the subduction or rollback of the Paleo-Pacific Plate [39,40,41,42]. The extensively distributed NEE-trending volcanic belts in eastern China and subduction-related magmatism in the Songliao Basin provide key evidence [42,43]. It has also been proposed that the closure of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean and subsequent post-orogenic extension exerted a significant influence on magmatism in the GXR and its western regions [5,44,45,46].
Based on the patterns of magmatic activity, Late Mesozoic magmatism in the southern GXR exhibits staged characteristics, with activity concentrated within two major periods: the Early-Middle Jurassic and Late Jurassic-Early Cretaceous. The interval of 150~145 Ma represents a tectonic transition stage, during which the region entered a phase of magmatic quiescence [47,48]. Consequently, existing studies have relatively sparse records of ore-forming plutons from 150 to 145 Ma. Meanwhile, according to the classification of the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS), ~150 Ma is assigned to the Late Jurassic, whereas 1:50,000-scale geological mapping projects classify it as Triassic, resulting in an apparent contradiction.
The Yexilinhundi region is located in the main ridge region of the southern GXR, within the Huanggangliang-Ganzhuermiao metallogenic belt, where numerous small-to-medium and large Sn-polymetallic deposits are developed, implying significant metallogenic potential in this region. This study focuses on the granites in this area, conducting petrographic, geochronological, petrogeochemical, and Lu-Hf isotopic analyses to characterize their magmatic sources and petrogenesis, explore the tectonic setting, and provide a scientific basis for understanding regional metallogenic processes and guiding prospecting efforts.

2. Geological Setting

The southern GXR is located in the overlapping zone of the Paleo-Asian Ocean tectonic domain and the Circum-Pacific tectonic domain. The subduction and closure of the Paleo-Asian Ocean during the Paleozoic led to the final amalgamation of geological tectonic units such as the Erguna Block and Xing’an Block in the region [49,50,51]. During the Mesozoic, the region underwent complex tectonic evolution processes, including the final closure of the Paleo-Asian Ocean, closure of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean, and subduction of the Paleo-Pacific Ocean, experiencing a transition from compressional to extensional settings and forming an NE-trending dominant tectonic framework.
The Yexilinhundi pluton is located approximately 40 km to the southeast of the Haobugao pluton. Both are located on the northern flank of the main ridge in the southern GXR, potentially sharing similar tectonic evolutionary histories and diagenesis-mineralization processes. The exposed strata in the southern GXR encompass Proterozoic, Paleozoic, Mesozoic, and Cenozoic units. The main ridge metallogenic belt primarily consists of Upper Paleozoic and Mesozoic strata (Figure 1). The exposed strata in the Yexilinhundi region mainly include the Permian Dashizhai Formation, Permian Zhesi Formation, the Jurassic Manketouebo Formation, and the Cenozoic Quaternary. The Dashizhai Formation is the oldest stratigraphic unit in the study area, with widespread exposure in the northwestern zone. Its outcrop area expands from the southwest to the northwest. The strata of this formation are predominantly composed of slate, phyllite, and intermediate-basic volcanic rocks. The Zhesi Formation is widely exposed in the southeastern area, consisting primarily of slate, glutenite, and graywacke. The Manketouebo Formation outcrops in a small area of the western study region, predominantly composed of volcanic rocks (Figure 2).
The southern GXR is characterized by intense magmatic activity with extensive development of intermediate-acid igneous rocks. Yanshanian intrusions are widely distributed, mainly in the form of stocks and batholiths, with lithologies including granite, alkaline granite, granite porphyry, and granodiorite, among others. Large-scale NE-trending folds and faults are well developed in the region, which have facilitated the coupled evolution of the tectono-magmatic system. Long-term and recurrent magmatic activities have provided abundant material sources and thermodynamic conditions for mineralization while controlling the spatial distribution of igneous rocks and polymetallic mineralization.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Sample Collection and Description

Granite samples were collected from the eastern part of Yexilinhundi, with sampling coordinates of 44°35′08″ N, 119°38′12″ E and 44°35′09″ N, 119°38′22″ E. The lithologies are granite porphyry and granodiorite, which show intrusive contact relationships and both intrude into Permian strata. The granite porphyry exhibits a flesh-red color, is weathering-resistant in the field, and occurs as positive topography. The rock features a porphyritic texture with a massive structure, containing phenocrysts (approximately 10%~15% of the whole rock) composed of quartz and plagioclase, with grain sizes ranging from 1 to 2 mm. The matrix is composed of felsic minerals. The granodiorite is non-weathering-resistant in the field and shows negative topography near the contact zone with the granite porphyry. The granodiorite is grayish-white in color, with relatively coarse mineral grains ranging from 0.5 to 3 mm in size, exhibiting a medium-fine-grained texture and massive structure. It is mainly composed of minerals such as plagioclase, biotite, quartz, and hornblende (Figure 3).

3.2. Analytical Methods

Zircon separation, cathode luminescence (CL) imaging, zircon U-Pb dating, Lu-Hf isotope analysis, and whole-rock major and trace element analysis were all conducted at Beijing Yanduzhongshi Geological Analysis Laboratories Ltd., Beijing, China.
After crushing and washing the samples, zircon grains were sorted and purified. Well-formed, clean, and intact zircon grains were then selected and embedded in epoxy resin. Following curing and polishing, CL images were captured. Zircon U-Pb dating was performed using a 193 nm ArF excimer laser coupled to an Agilent 7700X (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA) inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ICP-MS). Laser ablation was performed with a spot diameter of 24 μm and a frequency of 10 Hz, with helium used as the carrier gas during ablation. Data processing, calculation, and the construction of age concordia diagrams and histograms were performed following methods described in relevant literature [52,53].
We selected representative unaltered rocks for major and trace element determination. Samples were crushed and ground to below 200 mesh in a dust-free facility. Major elements were analyzed by XRF (X-ray fluorescence spectrometry) with an accuracy better than 5%, while trace elements were determined using a Bruker Aurora M90 inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (Bruker Daltonics, Billerica, MA, USA) with an accuracy better than 5%. Detailed methodologies are described in Liu et al. (2008) [54]. Lu-Hf isotope analysis was conducted using a Nu Plasma HR multi-collector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (MC-ICP-MS) (Nu Instruments Ltd., Wrexham, = UK) coupled to a New Wave UP 213 laser ablation system (Elemental Scientific Inc., Omaha, NE, USA). During the experiment, GJ-1 was employed as the standard for calibration. The laser spot diameter was 44 μm, and the frequency was set at 10 Hz. Detailed experimental procedures follow those described in Wu et al. [55].

4. Results

4.1. Zircon U-Pb Dating

Zircons from the Yexilinhundi granite porphyry (P01) and granodiorite (P02) are predominantly massive with high euhedral degrees, exhibiting distinct oscillatory zoning structures (Figure 4). The grains have a range from 90 to 150 μm and have length-to-width ratios of 1:1 to 2:1. The Th/U ratios are 0.29~0.49 and 0.28~0.57 for the two rocks, respectively, both belonging to magmatic zircons. Zircons exhibit high resistance to alteration, have a high closure temperature for the U-Pb isotope system, and crystallize early during magmatic evolution. As such, zircon ages represent the formation age of the rocks. We selected a total of 29 analytical spots for isotope dating. The 206Pb/238U ages of the granite porphyry (P01) and granodiorite (P02) range from 135.7 to 166.1 Ma and 149.4 to 151.1 Ma, respectively. The weighted mean ages are 145.0 ± 0.74 Ma (n = 8, MSWD = 6.1) and 150.3 ± 0.54 Ma (n = 21, MSWD = 0.21). The concordia diagram shows that all spots lie on the concordia line, indicating that both rocks are products of the Late Jurassic (Table A1, Figure 5).

4.2. Geochemical Characteristics

The granite porphyry (P01) exhibits relatively high SiO2 contents ranging from 75.58% to 76.68%, with differentiation index (DI) values of 94.68~95.48. K2O and Na2O contents are 3.87%~7.58% and 1.39%~3.97%, respectively, yielding K2O/Na2O ratios of 0.98~5.46. Total alkali contents (K2O + Na2O) range from 7.84% to 9.09%, indicating high alkali levels with distinctively high K/Na ratios. In the TAS diagram, samples plot in the granite field (Figure 6a). In the AR-SiO2 diagram, rock samples plot in the alkaline series field (Figure 6b). The Al2O3 contents are relatively low (11.79%~12.29%), with A/NK and A/CNK ratios ranging from 1.10 to 1.15 and 1.05 to 1.12, respectively. On the A/CNK-A/NK diagram, samples cluster in the weakly peraluminous field (Figure 6c); The granodiorite (P02) shows relatively high SiO2 contents of 67.51%~68.41% and DI values of 78.71~83.18. The total alkali content (K2O + Na2O) ranges from 6.79% to 7.10%, with samples plotting in the granodiorite field. In the AR-SiO2 diagram, samples plot in the transitional zone between the calc-alkaline and alkaline series. The A/NK ratios (1.50~1.56) and A/CNK ratios (1.29~1.38) indicate strongly peraluminous characteristics.
The granite porphyry (P01) samples have total rare earth elements (REEs) contents of 60.83 × 10−6~81.56 × 10−6, with δEu values of 0.07~0.09 and light rare earth elements to heavy rare earth elements ratios (ΣLREEs/ΣHREEs) of 1.62~2.09. Chondrite-normalized REEs distribution patterns show characteristics of LREEs enrichment and HREEs depletion. Trace element compositions are obviously enriched in Rb, Th, and Hf, and strongly depleted in Ba, P, and Ti (Table A2, Figure 7). The granodiorite (P02) samples exhibit REEs contents of 90.28 × 10−6~118.2 × 10−6, with δEu values of 0.4~0.6 and ΣLREEs/ΣHREEs ratios of 5.82~8.27. Chondrite-normalized REEs distribution patterns show prominent enrichment in LREEs and depletion in HREEs. Trace element compositions are enriched in Rb and Th, with strong depletion in Ba, Nb, Nd, Ti, and other elements, showing geochemical characteristics similar to those of other granite bodies in the region (Table A2, Figure 7).

4.3. Zircon Lu-Hf Isotope Analysis

Based on zircon U-Pb dating, we specifically selected analytical spots with highly concordant U-Pb ages and reliable results for subsequent Lu-Hf isotope analysis. A total of 20 Lu-Hf isotope analytical spots were chosen in this experiment. Most analyzed spots show 176Lu/177Hf ratios < 0.002, with numerically similar values, implying minimal accumulation of radiogenic Hf after zircon formation. The low content of 176Hf generated by 176Lu decay indicates that the measured 176Hf/177Hf ratios can represent the initial 176Hf/177Hf ratios at the time of zircon crystallization [62,63]. Zircons from the granite porphyry (P01) display 176Hf/177Hf ratios of 0.282712~0.282912 (mean = 0.282791), with εHf(t) values ranging from 0.600 to 7.81. The zircon single-stage Hf model ages (TDM1) are 514~851 Ma, and the zircon two-stage Hf model ages (TDM2) range from 698.0 to 1158 Ma. For the granodiorite (P02), zircon 176Hf/177Hf ratios range from 0.282779 to 0.282941 (mean = 0.282872), with εHf(t) values of 3.41~9.14. The TDM1 and TDM2 model ages range from 445 to 677 Ma and from 616.0 to 982.0 Ma, respectively.

5. Discussions

5.1. Metallogenic and Petrogenic Ages

The southern GXR experienced multiple episodes of concentrated magmatic activities during the Mesozoic, which can be categorized as Late Carboniferous, Early-Middle Permian, Early-Middle Triassic, and Late Jurassic-Early Cretaceous (Table A4, Figure 8), and reached its peak during the Early Cretaceous magmatic activity [64]. High-precision dating data show that the metallogenic ages of polymetallic deposits, including the Weilasituo, Dajing, Huanggang, and Haobugao deposits in the southern GXR (Table A4) are concentrated within 130~150 Ma. The petrogenetic-mineralization age distribution map of Sn-polymetallic deposits shows that the ages of rock bodies in the southern GXR become progressively younger from west to east. Additionally, Sn-polymetallic deposits in the southern GXR were formed during the Late Jurassic-Early Cretaceous, with the peaks of mineralization and petrogenetic ages showing high consistency, which indicates a close relationship between Late Jurassic-Early Cretaceous magmatism and Sn-polymetallic mineralization processes (Figure 8).
The weighted mean zircon U-Pb ages of the granite porphyry (P01) and granodiorite (P02) samples in the Yexilinhundi region are 145.0 ± 0.74 Ma (n = 8, MSWD = 6.1) and 150.3 ± 0.54 Ma (n = 21, MSWD = 0.21), respectively. Both were formed in the Late Jurassic, showing high temporal and spatial consistency with the Haobugao Sn-polymetallic deposit. This indicates a close genetic relationship with the mineralization of the Haobugao polymetallic deposit. Additionally, zircon εHf(t) values of Late Jurassic-Early Cretaceous intrusive rocks in the region range from approximately 0.8 to 10, coupled with relatively young two-stage model ages, implying that the plutons were derived from partial melting of juvenile crust.

5.2. Petrogenesis and Magma Source Region

According to the differences in magmatic source regions and formation mechanisms, granites are classified into S, I, M, and A-types [65]. The co-occurrence of A-type and highly fractionated I-type granites in the southern GXR is observed during the Late Mesozoic. Additionally, the low abundance of dark minerals in regional granites makes their discrimination challenging [66]. With advancing research, the concept of A-type granites has evolved from a narrow definition (alkaline, anhydrous, anorogenic) to a broader conceptual scope (ferroan, alkaline-calc-alkaline, metaluminous, weakly peraluminous, or peralkaline) [67,68,69,70]. Thus, the difficulty in discriminating between highly fractionated I-type granites and A-type granites has increased.
The Yexilinhundi granites lack characteristic minerals of S-type granites, such as cordierite and garnet, and have high whole-rock zircon saturation temperatures (Tzr) ranging from 783 °C to 816 °C, which are significantly different from those of S-type granites. Additionally, typical S-type granites in the Central Asian Orogenic Belt are also rarely reported [71]. The samples collected from the Yexilinhundi region are characterized by high-SiO2 and alkali-rich compositions (SiO2 = 67.51%~76.86%, Na2O + K2O = 6.79%~9.09%), high DI (78.71~95.48), and relatively low 10,000 × Ga/Al ratios, showing geochemical affinities to highly fractionated granites. However, under certain conditions, A-type granites can also exhibit similar characteristics due to intense fractional crystallization [72,73]. A defining feature of A-type granites is their high temperature, with an average Tzr of 833 °C [74]. The Tzr of the samples ranges from 783 °C to 816 °C, calculated using the formula designed by Watson et al. (1983) [75]. The Zr (138.96 × 10−6~179.31 × 10−6) and Zr + Y + Nb + Ce concentrations (199.46 × 10−6~257.03 × 10−6) of the samples are also significantly lower than the minimum thresholds of A-type granites (Zr = 250 × 10−6, Zr + Y + Nb + Ce > 350 × 10−6, [71]). Additionally, the negative correlation between SiO2 and P2O5 concentrations in these granites (Figure 9d) implies chemical affinities with I-type granites. All granite samples plot within the fields of I-type and highly fractionated granites (Figure 9a–c), and their characteristics—high Rb, Th, and U contents; low Ba, Ti, CaO, and FeOT/MgO ratios (3.00~4.52); peraluminous nature (A/CNK = 1.05~1.38); and negative Eu anomalies (δEu = 0.07~0.6)—indicate they belong to highly fractionated I-type granites.
A single-stage partial melting process is inadequate to form granites with high Rb and low Sr characteristics. Therefore, it can be inferred that the granite porphyry (P01) sample has undergone intense fractional crystallization. In the Sr-Rb/Sr and Eu/Eu* diagrams (Figure 10), the samples show evidence of plagioclase and biotite fractional crystallization. It can be inferred that Rb was enriched in the residual melt following the crystallization of biotite and other minerals, while Sr was depleted due to plagioclase crystallization, leading to further enrichment of Rb in the residual melt. In contrast, the granodiorite (P02) sample exhibits low Rb and high Sr characteristics, implying relatively weak magmatic differentiation. The DI of granodiorite (P02) is lower than that of granite porphyry (P01), while its solidification index (SI) is higher, which is consistent with this view. Based on this information, it is inferred that the granodiorite (P02) likely first underwent weak differentiation, followed by intense differentiation of the granite porphyry (P01).
Some scholars argue that most primary Sn-W mineralization is spatially closely associated with felsic igneous rocks [13,76]. These igneous rocks exhibit typical characteristics of a high degree of differentiation [77]. Many scholars consider that the granites associated with Sn mineralization are A-type granites [78,79,80]. However, considering that the metallogenic rockbodies are characterized by high-SiO2, high-Rb, and low-P2O5 features, some scholars argue that they belong to highly fractionated I-type granites [81,82,83,84]. The fractional crystallization of granites has made significant contributions to the formation of Sn-polymetallic deposits. The formations of deposits such as Hailiute, Daolundaba, and Weilasituo in the southern GXR are all associated with highly fractionated granites [34,85], as are the large Sn deposits of Gejiu and Dachang in South China, Sn-polymetallic deposits in northern Portugal, northern Thailand, and the Ore Mountains of Europe [86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93]. The Yexilinhundi granites are classified as highly fractionated I-type granites, and their emplacement ages are consistent within error limits with the peak period of regional magmatism and mineralization. Additionally, the oxygen fugacity values of the samples (average ΔFMQ = 12.09) indicate an extremely reduced environment. Sn exhibits significant incompatible element characteristics, preferentially entering the melt [94,95]. As fractional crystallization progresses, Sn gradually enriches in the residual melt, which demonstrates the close association between the Yexilinhundi highly fractionated I-type granites and the formation of regional Sn-polymetallic deposits, and also illuminates the mechanism of ore-forming element enrichment in regional Sn-polymetallic deposits.
Minerals 15 00813 g009aMinerals 15 00813 g009b
Figure 9. Various chemical discrimination diagrams for the granites. (a) Zr vs. 10,000 Ga/Al diagrams (after [72]); (b) 10,000 Ga/Al vs. (Zr + Nb + Ce + Y) diagrams (after [96]); (c) Ce vs. SiO2 diagrams (after [96]); (d) P2O5 vs. SiO2 diagrams; (e) Th vs. Rb diagrams.
Figure 9. Various chemical discrimination diagrams for the granites. (a) Zr vs. 10,000 Ga/Al diagrams (after [72]); (b) 10,000 Ga/Al vs. (Zr + Nb + Ce + Y) diagrams (after [96]); (c) Ce vs. SiO2 diagrams (after [96]); (d) P2O5 vs. SiO2 diagrams; (e) Th vs. Rb diagrams.
Minerals 15 00813 g009aMinerals 15 00813 g009b
Minerals 15 00813 g010
Figure 10. (a) Sr-Rb/Sr diagrams; (b) Eu/Eu*-Sr diagrams of granites in Yexilinhundi region.
Figure 10. (a) Sr-Rb/Sr diagrams; (b) Eu/Eu*-Sr diagrams of granites in Yexilinhundi region.
Minerals 15 00813 g010
Granites can be classified into “cold” and “hot” types based on Tzr values. The Tzr values of the Yexilinhundi granites fall within the range typical of hot granites (approximately 840 °C [97]), implying that their magmatic process was influenced by mantle-derived thermal input. The characteristics of highly fractionated granites imply that their formation may be related to fractional crystallization of minerals during magmatic evolution. Thus, we selected Hf isotopes—being less susceptible to external influences—to reflect the primary magmatic signatures. The εHf(t) values of the highly fractionated I-type granites analyzed in this study range from 0.600 to 9.14, plotting within the Hf isotopic composition domain of Phanerozoic igneous rocks in the eastern Central Asian Orogenic Belt (CAOB) (Figure 11). The samples exhibit Nd/Th ratios ranging from 0.22 to 0.31 (mean = 0.27) and 1.02 to 1.83 (mean = 1.28), respectively, and Nb/Ta ratios ranging from 8.44 to 8.90 and 7.91 to 8.24, respectively. These values are closely comparable to those of crust-derived rocks (Nd/Th = 3, Nb/Ta = 8.30) and differ from mantle-derived rocks (Nd/Th > 15, Nb/Ta = 17.8) [98]. The samples are enriched in Rb and depleted in elements such as Nb, P, and Ti, displaying distribution patterns similar to those of the middle-upper crust on chondrite-normalized REE patterns and primitive mantle-normalized trace element spider diagrams (Figure 7). Combined with the TDM2 (616.0~1158 Ma) of the samples, this indicates that the magma originated from partial melting of Mesoproterozoic-Neoproterozoic juvenile crustal materials [68]. Previous studies have demonstrated that granites in the GXR are generally characterized by distinct isotopic signatures: low initial 87Sr/86Sr ratios, high initial 143Nd/144Nd ratios, positive εNd(t) values, and young Nd model ages. These features all indicate that they were derived from the partial melting of juvenile crust [99,100,101,102]. Additionally, large-scale Jurassic granites in the GXR are related to the partial melting of crustal rocks [103]. Thus, it can be concluded that the magmatic source region was formed by partial melting of Mesoproterozoic-Neoproterozoic juvenile middle-upper crustal materials under the influence of mantle-derived heat, with possible minor incorporation of mantle-derived components.

5.3. Tectonic Setting

Numerous intracontinental extensional basins, such as the Hailar and Songliao basins, were developed in northeastern China during the Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous [8,105]. Moreover, bimodal volcanic rocks and alkaline granites were developed in the GXR during 150~120 Ma [9,106,107]. This indicates an extensional tectonic setting. Furthermore, Zhang et al. (1998) found that metamorphic core complexes were developed in the main peak belt in the GXR, providing key evidence for Late Mesozoic regional extensional tectonics [108].
Highly fractionated I-type granites are associated with subduction and post-orogenic settings [109,110,111,112]. The lithologies investigated in this study include granodiorite and granite porphyry, which are overall highly consistent with the high-K calc-alkaline granitoid characteristics of post-collisional settings as proposed in previous studies [113,114,115,116] (Figure 6b). Geochemical analyses show that the samples exhibit distinct characteristics of post-collisional intrusive rocks: enrichment in large ion lithophile elements (LILEs) such as Rb and Ba, and depletion in high field strength elements (HFSEs) such as Nb, Ta, and Ti [117]. Y + Nb-Rb and Y-Nb diagrams show that the samples plot predominantly in the post-collisional field (Figure 12) and exhibit a trend toward the intraplate field. Furthermore, in the Rb/30-Hf-3Ta diagram, the samples primarily plot within the post-collisional field. These characteristics are consistent with those of coeval granite samples from the southern GXR. These features collectively reveal a Late Jurassic regional extensional tectonic setting in the southern GXR, resulting from the collapse or delamination of thickened continental crust. Geochronological studies have shown that igneous rocks in the suture zone exhibit a west-to-east younging trend [118,119,120,121]. Paleomagnetic and paleogeographic studies, among others, have revealed that the Siberian Plate underwent a sustained clockwise rotation relative to the Central Mongolian Plate, leading to a “scissor-like” closure of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean from west to east [122,123,124]. Employing paleomagnetic, geological, and other research approaches, scholars studying magmatic rocks in Chengde and other regions of China have found that the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean remained incompletely closed during the Late Jurassic [8,121,125,126]. Analyses on Late Mesozoic metamorphic core complexes within Northeast Asia show that the regional middle-to-lower crustal extension can be constrained to 150~145 Ma [4], which is consistent with the regional mineralization timing. Several scholars have proposed that the geodynamic mechanism of Late Mesozoic lithospheric extension was driven by deep fracture or separation of the subducting Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean plate [5,8,127,128,129], including asthenospheric delamination and upwelling [130] (Figure 13). Geophysical surveys of the deep interior of the GXR have revealed the processes of asthenospheric upwelling and lithospheric extension [131]. Scholars have concluded, based on methods such as geology and paleomagnetism, that the final closure of the ocean occurred during the Late Jurassic-Early Cretaceous [132,133,134,135]. Additionally, Late Jurassic to early Early Cretaceous igneous rocks in Northeast China are predominantly distributed in the GXR and west of the Songliao Basin, with no significant magmatism recorded in the east [5]. This suggests that the collapse or delamination of the thickened lithosphere is associated with the post-collisional/post-orogenic extensional setting under subduction of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean [5,136,137].

6. Conclusions

(1)
Zircon LA-ICP-MS weighted mean ages of granite porphyry and granodiorite in the Yexilinhundi region are 145.0 ± 0.74 Ma (n = 8, MSWD = 6.1) and 150.3 ± 0.54 Ma (n = 21, MSWD = 0.21), respectively, belonging to Late Jurassic granites.
(2)
The Yexilinhundi granites are characterized by high SiO2 and alkali-rich, high DI, low CaO, as well as low Tzr. They are enriched in Rb, Th, and U, depleted in Ba and Ti, with δEu values ranging from 0.07 to 0.6, exhibiting features of highly fractionated I-type granites. These granites formed through partial melting of Mesoproterozoic-Neoproterozoic juvenile middle-upper crustal materials under mantle thermal influence, possibly with minor incorporation of mantle-derived components, and are closely associated with the formation of regional Sn polymetallic deposits.
(3)
The Late Jurassic granite porphyry and granodiorite in the Yexilinhundi region formed in a post-collisional/post-orogenic extensional setting, which is related to the subduction of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.Y. (Haixin Yue) and H.Y. (Henan Yu); methodology, Z.S.; software, Y.Y.; validation, Y.H., M.G. and Z.S.; formal analysis, H.Y. (Haixin Yue); investigation, Y.H.; resources, Z.S. and X.C.; data curation, H.Y. (Henan Yu); writing—original draft preparation, H.Y. (Haixin Yue); writing—review and editing, Z.S.; visualization, H.Y. (Henan Yu); supervision, Y.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by “Science and Technology Innovation Program for Postgraduate students in IDP subsidized by Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities”, grant number “ZY20250303”, and “The Langfang Science and Technology Research and Development Plan Self-funded Project”, grant number “2023013091”, “The APC” was funded by Science and Technology Innovation Program for Postgraduate students in IDP subsidized by Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (ZY20250303) and The Langfang Science and Technology Research and Development Plan Self-funded Project (2023013091).

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

We thank our supervisors Yu Henan and Sun Zhenjun for their guidance during the writing process. We also extend sincere thanks to the editors and reviewers of this paper. Their constructive comments and valuable suggestions have provided key guidance for refining research ideas and optimizing expression logic.

Conflicts of Interest

No potential commercial or financial relationships that could constitute a conflict of interest were found in this study.

Appendix A

Table A1. LA-MC-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb dating results of granites in Yexilinhundi region.
Table A1. LA-MC-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb dating results of granites in Yexilinhundi region.
Analytical Spot NumberPbThUTh/U206Pb/238U±1σ207Pb/235U±1σAges
10−6206Pb/238U±1σ207Pb/235U±1σ
granite porphyry(P01)
10.312117.033288.7840.400.021270.003650.149010.00629135.72.31141.05.56
23.291071.533161.850.330.022650.003450.150000.00260144.42.18141.92.29
38.952122.488223.740.310.022740.003910.152150.00411145.02.47143.83.62
411.02182.169984.490.290.022800.003880.156580.00306145.42.45147.72.69
57.162419.124718.820.490.024490.003660.192520.00684156.02.30178.85.82
65.481563.074252.780.370.022810.004390.186120.00762145.42.77173.36.52
728.12895.439826.730.340.026100.004080.343380.00731166.12.56299.75.53
89.331514.423848.180.380.023210.003220.305980.00709147.92.03271.15.52
granodiorite(P02)
10.957331.675800.5910.410.023440.0003650.160480.00382149.42.30151.13.34
21.00293.654846.1710.340.023510.0004240.160860.00381149.82.67151.53.34
31.15350.7061014.770.350.023510.0003850.162590.00500149.82.42153.04.37
41.11304.262917.3020.330.023530.0003050.159020.00424149.91.92149.83.72
50.816235.029639.2130.360.023540.0003360.162050.00540150.02.12152.54.72
60.722200.752623.8530.320.023540.0004620.163380.00706150.02.91153.76.17
71.16406.962921.9810.430.023540.0004590.157290.00557150.02.89148.34.89
81.05344.514910.5980.370.023560.0004870.159080.00435150.13.07149.93.81
90.930294.662741.1770.380.023570.0003910.160420.00388150.22.46151.13.40
100.612157.352587.0360.280.023580.0006330.158160.00767150.23.99149.16.72
111.00302.814806.8180.370.023590.0003250.160020.00511150.32.05150.74.48
121.23380.4961066.360.360.023630.0004340.157890.00380150.62.73148.93.34
130.711190.763528.6940.340.023630.0003470.161620.00414150.62.19152.13.62
141.22419.8041041.510.390.023640.0003910.158530.00354150.62.46149.43.10
151.10428.326933.1250.450.023640.0003960.158990.00383150.62.49149.83.35
160.29584.4611244.8820.350.023650.0005090.164860.00989150.73.21154.98.62
171.97232.002820.4960.280.023660.0003530.157810.00386150.82.22148.83.38
181.13421.5311002.510.400.023690.0005400.158950.00495150.93.40149.84.34
191.74852.5551438.630.570.023690.0003870.163740.00306150.92.44154.02.67
201.01305.131879.7340.350.023700.0003470.157940.00343151.02.19148.93.01
211.31470.8581242.780.390.023710.0005910.159350.00554151.13.72150.14.85
Table A2. Analysis results of major and trace elements of granites in Yexilinhundi region.
Table A2. Analysis results of major and trace elements of granites in Yexilinhundi region.
Testing ItemsP01-1P01-2P01-3P01-4P01-5P02-1P02-2P02-3P02-4P02-5
Al2O311.8312.2311.7912.2412.2915.3616.0815.9115.9215.36
SiO276.1276.6875.5875.8676.4268.2067.6768.3368.4167.51
CaO0.3240.2140.2810.1340.2180.6941.141.360.981.09
K2O5.174.147.587.383.872.212.372.032.071.77
Fe2O31.281.281.111.180.9073.953.613.363.584.27
FeO0.180.260.120.120.720.920.160.120.241.0
MgO0.3090.3120.3070.2690.3551.421.031.021.161.31
MnO0.030.030.030.030.040.080.090.10.090.08
Na2O3.143.821.391.713.974.784.734.914.865.02
P2O50.0410.0320.0300.0260.0430.160.170.170.180.16
TiO20.120.120.0860.0970.140.580.610.650.670.53
Total98.5499.1198.3199.0598.9798.3597.6697.9598.1498.09
LOI1.020.9851.150.9491.122.772.562.442.472.67
K2O + Na2O8.317.958.979.097.846.987.106.946.936.79
A/NK1.101.141.121.131.151.501.551.551.561.51
A/CNK1.051.101.081.121.121.381.341.291.371.30
AR3.144.186.796.544.362.542.402.342.392.41
DI95.3295.1395.4895.1794.6882.6682.9582.7683.1878.71
SI3.093.182.962.423.6710.858.819.079.919.97
Li25.9332.1931.5824.1533.3645.7640.4338.2144.1738.20
Be5.433.882.683.163.643.204.003.703.993.35
Sc2.122.671.361.602.767.346.557.718.216.01
Ti754.06733.37554.76630.41814.073256.03591.13611.83571.02880.8
V11.1510.9711.0510.1412.6650.9143.9845.3449.7740.71
Mn204.63216.87202.31218.05267.82581.15688.27714.55606.26558.02
Co2.041.721.591.432.159.497.464.354.7212.7
Ni28.87.9117.710.67.696.1336.29.7013.88.64
Cu3.814.034.123.293.6687.839.219.418.7126
Zn65.9683.3171.9276.6267.3558.4558.9660.4157.1558.07
Ga16.5320.5015.5615.5720.1220.0221.4619.9119.7020.24
As7.377.1911.010.55.6115.77.953.363.3234.8
Rb339.91262.46463.03467.96237.39140.60140.86124.64140.98109.98
Sr81.2782.0478.3078.2081.30328.1509.7508.7467.5428.2
Y44.6347.7632.7836.0644.7818.1416.5517.3418.2119.48
Zr144.48145.50144.90147.83149.18163.19178.53165.69179.31138.96
Nb29.730.628.830.930.08.268.678.698.397.36
Mo11.34.7411.64.934.071.4825.32.789.141.30
Cd0.510.600.460.390.790.540.600.510.550.56
Cs5.744.358.248.474.047.416.316.056.716.27
Ba133.88118.72129.97114.28122.05241.18302.06241.55227.26196.05
La5.184.244.973.363.0716.118.222.121.416.4
Ce27.4821.4117.5320.4323.3541.2641.1848.2451.1333.66
Pr2.792.432.301.991.984.174.545.105.294.20
Nd13.6612.3312.1110.3310.6217.6219.6621.1222.6218.25
Sm5.335.094.104.134.323.743.923.984.273.84
Eu0.150.130.100.0910.130.530.620.570.540.71
Gd4.834.563.543.724.003.263.423.533.673.42
Tb1.21.10.830.941.00.560.560.580.610.59
Dy8.298.265.916.927.743.303.193.173.403.49
Ho1.71.81.31.51.70.700.640.670.720.75
Er4.695.023.473.994.741.991.891.902.032.13
Tm0.790.870.560.660.820.290.270.280.300.32
Yb4.775.643.604.065.261.861.781.821.932.19
Lu0.740.830.530.590.790.300.300.290.300.35
Hf8.177.667.528.247.584.595.084.654.953.90
Ta3.513.443.413.613.421.001.081.101.050.906
W0.660.600.870.960.615.03.01.32.71.4
Tl2.862.174.304.271.941.331.091.011.200.99
Pb36.7135.5540.5333.0939.8112.5118.9720.2321.2513.47
Bi0.4661.090.7370.4250.7542.182.290.6850.5143.56
Th43.7743.9539.7746.6044.2314.8416.2220.7319.359.963
U8.217.087.778.817.871.761.641.771.761.63
Zr + Ce + Nb + Y246.24245.29224.01235.19247.32230.85244.94239.96257.03199.46
ΣREE81.5673.7460.8362.6869.5395.62100.2113.4118.290.28
ΣLREE54.5945.6341.1240.3343.4783.3788.14101.1105.377.04
ΣHREE26.9628.1119.7122.3426.0712.2512.0412.2312.9713.24
ΣLREE/ΣHREE2.021.622.091.811.676.807.328.278.125.82
δEu0.090.080.080.070.090.50.50.50.40.6
TZr(℃)783788786791791806811801814816
(La/Yb)n0.780.540.990.590.426.27.38.78.05.4
10,000Ga/Al2.643.172.492.403.092.462.522.362.342.49
Table A3. Zircon Lu-Hf isotope analysis of the granites in Yexilinhundi region.
Table A3. Zircon Lu-Hf isotope analysis of the granites in Yexilinhundi region.
Pointnumber176Yb/177Hf2σ176Lu/177Hf2σ176Hf/177Hf2σt(Ma)εHf(0)εHf(t)TDMTDM2fLu/Hf
P01-010.209620.002090.0048840.0000690.2828170.000021135.71.604.15687925.0−0.85
P01-020.129080.001850.0033790.0000850.2829120.000020144.44.957.81514698.0−0.90
P01-030.193970.001840.0048290.0000950.2827120.000023145.0−2.130.6008511158−0.85
P01-040.184670.002310.0047870.000120.2827550.000022145.4−0.6002.137821060−0.86
P01-070.204440.002650.0051450.0000560.2827610.000021166.1−0.3902.707811040−0.85
P02-10.0575550.0005090.0017220.0000320.2828880.000017150.94.117.24525737.0−0.95
P02-20.0468460.0007430.0013440.00000600.2829050.000014151.04.717.92495696.0−0.96
P02-30.0411280.0006090.0012870.0000320.2828920.000018151.14.267.46513725.0−0.96
P02-50.0414630.0002980.0012720.0000210.2828690.000017149.83.436.58546778.0−0.96
P02-60.0514150.0003640.0015200.0000190.2828690.000015149.43.426.57550781.0−0.95
P02-70.0504630.0005820.0015300.0000310.2829080.000020150.74.827.98494692.0−0.95
P02-80.0421300.0004210.0012990.0000150.2828840.000015150.03.957.12526746.0−0.96
P02-90.0499390.002110.0014210.0000390.2828670.000016150.63.376.53551783.0−0.96
P02-110.0493230.0002820.0014760.0000270.2828620.000016150.63.176.35560797.0−0.96
P02-120.0525000.0006770.0014480.0000280.2827790.000019150.20.2603.41677982.0−0.96
P02-130.0576910.001390.0016850.0000180.2828480.000015149.92.705.84582828.0−0.95
P02-140.0508920.0002160.0014290.0000190.2828620.000015150.03.176.34559796.0−0.96
P02-150.0519610.0007230.0014620.0000190.2829410.000016150.15.999.14445616.0−0.96
P02-160.0343500.001300.0010400.0000210.2828450.000014150.32.595.78577832.0−0.97
P02-180.0373490.0002390.0010820.0000230.2828560.000016150.82.966.18562807.0−0.97
Table A4. Statistical table of ages for tin-polymetallic deposits and related plutons in the Southern GXR.
Table A4. Statistical table of ages for tin-polymetallic deposits and related plutons in the Southern GXR.
Study AreaTypeMethodSubject(s)Ages (Ma)References
Baerzherock massRb-Sr isotope datingRiebeckite granite125[140]
Xilinhaoterock massZircon SHRIMP U-Pb datingA-type miarolitic granite276 ± 2[141]
Wulanhaoterock massZircon U-Pb datingBiotite granodiorite174 ± 4[142]
Wulanhaoterock massZircon U-Pb datingBiotite granodiorite182 ± 3[142]
Wulanhaoterock massZircon U-Pb datingBiotite granodiorite222 ± 5[142]
Wulanhaoterock massZircon U-Pb datingHornblende alkali-feldspar granite229 ± 3[142]
Mengentaolegairock massZircon U-Pb datingBiotite granite281 ± 11[143]
Mengentaolegairock massZircon U-Pb datingMuscovite granite281 ± 3[143]
Baiyingaolerock massZircon U-Pb datingMeilindaba rock mass313 ± 5[144]
Baiyingaolerock massZircon U-Pb datingWulangou rock mass315 ± 4[144]
Baiyingaolerock massZircon U-Pb datingBaiyingaole rock mass323 ± 4[144]
Linxirock massZircon U-Pb datingGranite241 ± 3.2[145]
Xiwuqirock massZircon U-Pb datingMedium-fine grained quartz diorite325 ± 3[146]
Xiwuqirock massZircon U-Pb datingMedium-coarse grained quartz diorite322 ± 3[146]
Beidashanrock massZircon SHRIMP U-Pb datingBeidashan granite mass140 ± 3[147]
Baiyingaolerock massZircon SHRIMP U-Pb datingQuartz diorite326 ± 3[147]
Weilasituoore body40Ar-39Ar datingMuscovite133.4 ± 1[148]
Taipinggouore bodyRe-Os isotope datingMolybdenite130 ± 1[149]
Weilasituorock massZircon U-Pb datingDiorite310 ± 2[150]
Weilasituorock massZircon U-Pb datingQuartz diorite311 ± 2[150]
Bairendabarock massZircon U-Pb datingGranite porphyry319 ± 3[150]
Banlishanrock massZircon U-Pb datingGranodiorite porphyry133.5 ± 1.7[151]
Banlishanrock massZircon U-Pb datingRhyolite porphyry160 ± 2[151]
Huanggangore bodyRe-Os isotope datingMolybdenite135.31 ± 0.85[152]
Baiyinnuoerrock massZircon LA-MC-ICP-MS datingGranodiorite (porphyry)244.5 ± 0.9[153]
Baiyinnuoerrock massZircon LA-MC-ICP-MS datingQuartz porphyry134.8 ± 1.2[153]
Aoergairock massZircon U-Pb datingGranite porphyry245.4 ± 1.8[154]
Huanggangliangore bodyRe-Os isotope datingMolybdenite134.9 ± 5.2[155]
Huanggangrock massZircon U-Pb datingPotassic granite136.7 ± 1.1[156]
Huanggangrock massZircon U-Pb datingGranite porphyry136.8 ± 0.57[156]
Dajingore bodyCassiterite U-Pb datingTin-rich ore body144 ± 16[157]
Honglingore bodyRe-Os isotope datingSpotted molybdenite139.9 ± 2.3[158]
Huanggangrock massZircon U-Pb datingPotassic granite139.96 ± 0.87[159]
Bianjiadayuanrock massZircon U-Pb datingGranite porphyry143.2 ± 1.5[160]
Beidashanrock massZircon U-Pb datingBiotite granite140 ± 3[161]
Beidashanrock massZircon U-Pb datingBiotite granite139 ± 2[161]
Weilasituoore bodyMolybdenite Re-Os datingGreisen mineralization135 ± 11[161]
Weilasituoore bodyMuscovite40Ar-39Ar datingVein-type ore129.5 ± 0.9[161]
Shuangjianzihanrock massZircon U-Pb datingGranite porphyry134 ± 1.2[60]
Weilasituoore bodyCassiterite U-Pb dating Vein-type ore 135 ± 6[33]
Haobugaorock massZircon U-Pb datingGranite142.6 ± 1.6[162]
Bianjiadayuanore bodyMolybdenite Re-Os datingVein-type ore140 ± 0.7[163]
Daolundabaore bodyCassiterite U-Pb datingTin ore144.3 ± 1.9[164]
Weilasituoore bodyMolybdenite Re-Os datingVein-type ore129 ± 4.6[165]
Weilasituoore bodyMolybdenite Re-Os dating Vein-type ore135 ± 7[166]
Baogaigourock massZircon U-Pb datingGranite145.6 ± 0.8[167]
Baiyinnuoerrock massZircon U-Pb datingGranodiorite248 ± 1.3[168]
Baiyinnuoerrock massZircon U-Pb datingDiorite249 ± 1.4[168]
Bairendabarock massZircon U-Pb datingGabbro248 ± 2.7[168]
Daolundabarock massZircon U-Pb datingFine-grained granite136.1 ± 0.4[34]
Daolundabarock massZircon U-Pb datingGranite porphyry134 ± 6.6[34]
Maodengore bodyZircon U-Pb datingVein-type ore139 ± 0.2[169]
Anleore bodyZircon U-Pb datingVein-type ore146.8 ± 2.2[170]
Qianjinchangrock massZircon U-Pb datingBiotite monzogranite278 ± 1[63]
Qianjinchangrock massZircon U-Pb datingBiotite monzogranite279 ± 1[63]
Haobugaorock massZircon U-Pb datingGranite porphyry134 ± 0.6[36]
Haobugaorock massZircon U-Pb datingGranite porphyry133.4 ± 0.9[36]

References

  1. Wu, G.; Zhang, T.; Chen, Z.Y.; Wu, L.W.; Chen, Y.C. Ore–Forming Age, Genesis, and Metallogenic Model of Sn Polymetallic Deposits in the Southern Great Xing’an Range. West. Resour. 2022, 151, 105226. [Google Scholar]
  2. Chen, G.Z.; Wu, G.; Wu, W.H.; Zhang, T.; Li, T.G.; Liu, Q.L.; Wu, L.W.; Pei, Z.C.; Jiang, B.; Wang, Z.L. Fluid inclusion study and isotope characteristics of the Daolundaba copper-polymetallic deposit in the southern Great Xing’an Range. Earth Sci. Front. 2018, 25, 202–221. [Google Scholar]
  3. Mao, J.W.; Liu, P.; Goldfarb, R.J.; Goryachev, N.A.; Pirajno, F.; Zheng, W.; Zhou, M.F.; Zhao, C.; Xie, G.Q.; Yuan, S.D.; et al. Cretaceous large-scale metal accumulation triggered by post-subductional large-scale extension, East Asia. Ore Geol. Rev. 2021, 136, 104270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Wang, T.; Guo, L.; Zheng, Y.D.; Donskaya, T.; Gladkochub, D.; Zeng, L.S.; Li, J.B.; Wang, Y.B.; Mazukabzov, A. Timing and processes of late Mesozoic mid-lower-crustal extension in continental NE Asia and implications for the tectonic setting of the destruction of the North China Craton: Mainly constrained by zircon U-Pb ages from metamorphic core complexes. Lithos 2012, 154, 315–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Xu, W.L.; Pei, F.P.; Wang, F.; Meng, E.; Ji, W.Q.; Yang, D.B.; Wang, W. Spatial-temporal relationships of Mesozoic volcanic rocks in NE China: Constraints on tectonic overprinting and transformations between multiple tectonic regimes. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2013, 74, 167–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Wu, G.; Li, X.Z.; Xu, L.Q.; Wang, G.R.; Liu, J.; Zhang, T.; Quan, Z.X.; Wu, H.; Li, T.G.; Zeng, Q.T.; et al. Age, geochemistry, and Sr-Nd-Hf-Pb isotopes of the Caosiyao porphyry Mo deposit in Inner Mongolia, China. Ore Geol. Rev. 2017, 81 Pt 2, 706–727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Jia, L.; Wu, C.Z.; Jiao, J.G.; Qian, Z.Z.; Lei, R.X. Geochronology and geochemistry of the Beidashan pluton in the southern Great Xing’an Range, Northeast China: Implication for its petrogenesis and metallogenic potential. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2024, 40, 961–986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ouyang, H.G.; Mao, J.W.; Santosh, M.; Zhou, J.; Zhou, Z.H.; Wu, Y.; Hou, L. Geodynamic setting of Mesozoic magmatism in NE China and surrounding regions: Perspectives from spatio-temporal distribution patterns of ore deposits. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2013, 78, 222–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Zhao, W.C.; Chen, J.D.; Wei, L.M.; Li, W.; Qin, J.J.; Liu, A.X.; Liu, Z. LA-MC-ICP-MS Cassiterite U-Pb Dating and Implications in Haobugao Skarn Polymetallic District, Southern Great Hinggan Mountains. Geol. Rev. 2025, 71, 997–1010. [Google Scholar]
  10. Zhang, T.F.; Guo, S.; Xin, H.T.; Zhang, Y.; He, P.; Liu, W.G.; Zhang, K.; Liu, C.B.; Wang, K.X.; Zhang, C. Petrogenesis and Magmatic Evolution of Highly Fractionated Granite and Their Constraints on Sn-(Li-Rb-Nb-Ta) Mineralization in the Weilasituo Deposit, Inner Mongolia, Southern Great Xing’an Range, China. Earth Sci. 2019, 44, 248–267. [Google Scholar]
  11. Wu, G.; Liu, R.L.; Chen, G.Z.; Li, T.G.; Li, R.H.; Li, Y.L.; Yang, F.; Zhang, T. Mineralization of the Weilasituo rare metal-tin polymetallic ore deposit in Inner Mongolia: Insights from fractional crystallization of granitic magmas. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2021, 37, 637–664. [Google Scholar]
  12. Zhang, P.C.; Peng, B.; Zhao, J.Z.; Zhang, Z.F.; Zhao, J.; Guo, G.F.; Zuo, Y.S.; He, J.; Wang, X. Zircon U-Pb geochronology, geochemistry and mineralization significance of Hailiute highly fractionated granites in the Southern Da Hinggan Mountains. Acta Petrol. Mineral. 2022, 41, 1029–1046. [Google Scholar]
  13. Heinrich, C.A. The chemistry of hydrothermal tin(-tungsten) ore deposition. Econ. Geol. 1990, 85, 457–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Mao, J.W.; Cheng, Y.B.; Guo, C.L.; Yang, Z.X.; Feng, J.R. Gejiu Tin Polymetallic Ore Field: Deposit Model and Discussion for Several Points Concerned. Acta Geol. Sin. 2008, 82, 1455–1467. [Google Scholar]
  15. Guo, J. Tin Mineralization Events and Fertility of Granitoids in the Youjiang Basin, South China: The Gejiu and Dachang Sn—Polymetallic Districts as Examples. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Guangzhou Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences), Guangzhou, China, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  16. Sun, K.K.; Deng, J.; Wang, Q.F.; Chen, B.; Xu, R.; Ma, Z.F. Formation of Sn-rich granitic magma: A case study of the highly evolved Kafang granite in the Gejiu tin polymetallic ore district, South China. Miner. Depos. 2023, 58, 359–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Xiao, S.G.; Xu, H.; Chang, G.H.; Yu, L.; Wang, Z.Y.; Zhang, Z.M.; Zhang, J.X.; Tang, J.; Lu, N.D.; Yang, W.J. Petrogenesis and mineralization of leucogranite in Yangshan area, Gejiu city, Yunnan Province: Constraints on Petrogeochemistry and Monazite U-Pb Dating. Mineral. Petrol. 2024, 44, 41–57. [Google Scholar]
  18. Li, X.L.; Mao, J.W.; Cheng, Y.B.; Zhang, J. Petrogenesis of the Gaofengshan granite in Gejiu area, Yunnan Province: Zircon U-Pb dating and geochemical constraints. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2012, 28, 183–198. [Google Scholar]
  19. Huang, W.L.; Xu, J.F.; Chen, J.L.; Huang, F.; Zeng, Y.C.; Pi, Q.H.; Cai, Y.F.; Jiang, X.Z. Geochronology and geochemistry of the Gejiu complex in Yunnan Province, SW China: Petrogenesis and contributions of mantle-derived melts to tin mineralization. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2016, 32, 2330–2346. [Google Scholar]
  20. Hao, Y.J.; Ren, Y.S.; Shi, Y.F.; Shang, Q.Q.; Sun, Z.M.; Gao, Y.; Wang, C.Y.; Yang, Q. Geochronology, petrogenesis and tectonic setting of the granite porphyry related to Hekoulinchang tin polymetallic deposit in Wandashan area, Heilongjiang Province. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2020, 36, 837–855. [Google Scholar]
  21. Sun, H.R.; Lü, Z.C.; Han, Z.R.; Du, Z.Z.; Zhang, X.M.; Wang, H. Genesis and geological significance of Late Jurassic high-B ore-bearing A-type granite in the Dayishan tin deposit, Hunan Province. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2021, 37, 1749–1764. [Google Scholar]
  22. Yang, Q.D.; Cao, L.; Liu, A.S.; Li, B.; Zhao, K.; Hu, P.; Cui, S.; Dai, P.Y. Genesis of Mesozoic alkaline granites and biotite granites in Nigeria and its significance for tin-polymetallic prospecting. Geol. Bull. China 2023, 42, 1334–1352. [Google Scholar]
  23. Chen, Z.G.; Zhang, L.C.; Wu, H.Y.; Wan, B.; Zeng, Q.D. Geochemistry study and tectonic background of A-style host granite in Nianzigou molybdenum deposit in Xilamulun molybdenum metallogenic belt, Inner Mongolia. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2008, 24, 879–889. [Google Scholar]
  24. Singh, S.K.; Singh, S. Geochemistry and Tungsten Metallogeny of the Balda Granite, Rajasthan, India. Gondwana Res. 2001, 4, 487–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Yuan, S.D.; Williams-Jones, A.E.; Mao, J.W.; Zhao, P.L.; Yan, C.; Zhang, D.L. The Origin of the Zhangjialong Tungsten Deposit, South China: Implications for W-Sn Mineralization in Large Granite Batholiths. Econ. Geol. 2018, 113, 1193–1208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Wu, Y.H.; Han, J.T.; Liu, Y.H.; Ma, G.Q.; Han, F.X.; Yang, Y.C.; Liu, L.J.; Guo, L.; Guan, Y.; Zhang, Y.H.; et al. Metallogenic model of the Shuangjianzishan Ag-Pb-Zn district, Northeast China: Revealed from integrated geophysical investigation. Geosci. Front. 2022, 13, 101321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Blevin, P.L.; Chappell, B.W. Chemistry, origin, and evolution of mineralized granites in the Lachlan Fold Belt, Australia: The metallogeny of I- and S-type granites. Econ. Geol. 1995, 90, 1604–1619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Zhao, Z.Y.; Hou, L.; Ding, J.; Zhang, Q.M.; Wu, S.Y. A genetic link between Late Cretaceous granitic magmatism and Sn mineralization in the southwestern South China Block: A case study of the Dulong Sn-dominant polymetallic deposit. Ore Geol. Rev. 2018, 93, 268–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Mao, J.W.; Zhou, Z.H.; Wu, G.; Jiang, S.H.; Liu, C.L.; Li, H.M.; Ouyang, H.G.; Liu, J. Metallogenic regularity and minerogenetic series of ore deposits in Inner Mongolia and adjacent areas. Miner. Depos. 2013, 32, 716–730. [Google Scholar]
  30. Liu, Y.; Jiang, S.H. Geological characteristics and genesis of the Haobugao Zn-Fe deposit in eastern Inner Mongolia. Miner. Depos. 2014, 33, 227–228. [Google Scholar]
  31. Ouyang, H.G.; Mao, J.W.; Santosh, M.; Wu, Y.; Hou, L.; Wang, X.F. The Early Cretaceous Weilasituo Zn–Cu–Ag vein deposit in the southern Great Xing’an Range, northeast China: Fluid Inclusions, H, O, S, Pb isotope geochemistry and genetic implications. Ore Geol. Rev. 2014, 56, 503–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ouyang, H.G.; Mao, J.W.; Zhou, Z.H.; Su, H.M. Late Mesozoic metallogeny and intracontinental magmatism, southern Great Xing’an Range, northeastern China. Gondwana Res. 2015, 27, 1153–1172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wang, F.X.; Bagas, L.; Jiang, S.H.; Liu, Y.F. Geological, geochemical, and geochronological characteristics of Weilasituo Sn-polymetal deposit, Inner Mongolia, China. Ore Geol. Rev. 2017, 80, 1206–1229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Chen, G.Z.; Wu, G.; Li, T.G.; Liu, R.L.; Li, R.H.; Li, Y.L.; Yang, F. Mineralization of the Daolundaba Cu–Sn–W–Ag deposit in the southern Great Xing’an Range, China: Constraints from geochronology, geochemistry, and Hf isotope. Ore Geol. Rev. 2021, 133, 104117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zeng, Q.W.; Dai, X.L.; Dong, G.C.; Wei, L.M.; Qin, J.J.; Chen, J.D.; Xiao, Y.; Shu, Q.H. Trace element characteristics of sphalerite in the Haobugao Zn-Pb deposit, Inner Mongolia, and their geological significance. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2023, 39, 567–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Li, M.L.; Yu, H.N.; Tian, Y.; Yue, H.X.; He, Y.P.; Yu, Y.B.; Sun, Z.J. Genesis and tectonic implications of Early Cretaceous granites in the Haobugao area, southern Great Xing’an Range: Insights from zircon U-Pb geochronology, Hf isotopic composition, and petrochemistry. Minerals 2024, 14, 1139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Liu, L.J.; Zhou, T.F.; Jiang, S.Y.; Zhang, D.Y.; White, N.C. Amphibole Geochemistry in the Haobugao Skarn Zn-Fe-Sn Deposit in the Southern Great Xing’an Range: Implications for the Ore-Forming Process. Ore Geol. Rev. 2024, 170, 106122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Yang, F.; Wu, G.; Chen, G.Z.; Li, S.H.; Li, Y.L.; Zhang, T.; Chen, Y.J. Petrogenesis and implications for tin mineralization of the Beidashan granitic pluton, southern Great Xing’an Range, NE China: Constraints from whole-rock and accessory mineral geochemistry. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2024, 259, 105883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Zhang, J.H.; Gao, S.; Ge, W.C.; Wu, F.Y.; Yang, J.H.; Wilde, S.A.; Li, M. Geochronology of the Mesozoic volcanic rocks in the Great Xing’an Range, northeastern China: Implications for subduction-induced delamination. Chem. Geol. 2010, 276, 144–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Dong, Y.; Ge, W.C.; Yang, H.; Zhao, G.C.; Wang, Q.H.; Zhang, Y.L.; Su, L. Geochronology and geochemistry of Early Cretaceous volcanic rocks from the Baiyingaolao Formation in the central Great Xing’an Range, NE China, and its tectonic implications. Lithos 2014, 205, 168–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Dong, Y.; Ge, W.C.; Yang, H.; Xu, W.L.; Zhang, Y.L.; Bi, J.H.; Liu, X.W. Geochronology, geochemistry, and Hf isotopes of Jurassic intermediate-acidic intrusions in the Xing’an Block, northeastern China: Petrogenesis and implications for subduction of the Paleo-Pacific oceanic plate. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2016, 118, 11–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Sun, M.D.; Chen, H.L.; Milan, L.A.; Wilde, S.A.; Jourdan, F.; Xu, Y.G. Continental Arc and Back-Arc Migration in Eastern NE China: New Constraints on Cretaceous Paleo-Pacific Subduction and Rollback. Am. Geophys. Union (AGU) 2018, 37, 3893–3915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Wu, F.Y.; Sun, D.Y.; Zhang, G.L.; Ren, X.W. Deep Deodynamic of the Yanshain Movement. Geol. J. China Univ. 2000, 6, 379–388. [Google Scholar]
  44. Zhou, J.B.; Wilde, S.A.; Zhang, X.Z.; Zhao, G.C.; Zheng, C.Q.; Wang, Y.J.; Zhang, X.H. The onset of Pacific margin accretion in NE China: Evidence from the Heilongjiang high-pressure metamorphic belt. Tectonophysics 2009, 478, 230–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ji, Z.; Meng, Q.A.; Wan, C.B.; Ge, W.C.; Yang, H.; Zhang, Y.L.; Dong, Y.; Jin, X. Early Cretaceous adakitic lavas and A-type rhyolites in the Songliao Basin, NE China: Implications for the mechanism of lithospheric extension. Gondwana Res. 2019, 71, 28–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Deng, C.Z.; Sun, D.Y.; Li, G.H.; Lu, S.; Tang, Z.Y.; Gou, J.; Yang, Y.J. Early Cretaceous volcanic rocks in the Great Xing’an Range: Late effect of a flat-slab subduction. J. Geodyn. 2019, 124, 38–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Gtscher, M.A.; Maury, R.; Eissen, J.P.; Bourdon, E. Can slab melting be caused by flat subduction? Geology 2000, 28, 535–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Jing, J.H. Geochronological and Geochemical Characteristics of Volcanic Rocks from Shangkuli Formation in Tulihe Region, Northern Great Xing’an Range. Master’s Thesis, Jilin University, Changchun, China, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  49. Xiao, W.; Kröner, A.; Windley, B. Geodynamic Evolution of Central Asia in the Paleozoic and Mesozoic. Int. J. Earth Sci. (Geol. Rundsch.) 2009, 98, 1185–1188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Wu, F.Y.; Sun, D.Y.; Ge, W.C.; Zhang, Y.B.; Grant, M.L.; Wilde, S.A.; Jahn, B.M. Geochronology of the Phanerozoic granitoids in northeastern China. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2011, 41, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Lü, H.B.; Feng, X.D.; Wang, J.; Zhu, X.Q.; Dong, X.P.; Zhang, H.C.; Zhang, Y.X. Ophiolitic Mélanges Found in Mount Langshan as the Crucial Evidence of Collisional Margin between North China Craton and Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Geol. Rev. 2018, 64, 777–805. [Google Scholar]
  52. Ludwig, K.R. Isoplot 3.00: A Geochronological Toolkit for Microsoft Excel, Berkeley; Berkeley Geochronology Center Special Publication: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2003; Volume 4, pp. 1–70. [Google Scholar]
  53. Liu, Y.S.; Gao, S.; Hu, Z.C.; Gao, C.G.; Zong, K.Q.; Wang, D.B. Continental and Oceanic Crust Recycling-induced Melt-Peridotite Interactions in the Trans-North China Orogen: U-Pb Dating, Hf Isotopes and Trace Elements in Zircons from Mantle Xenoliths. J. Petrol. 2010, 51, 537–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Liu, Y.S.; Hu, Z.C.; Gao, S.; Günther, D.; Xu, J.; Gao, C.G.; Chen, H.H. In situ analysis of major and trace elements of anhydrous minerals by LA-ICP-MS without applying an internal standard. Chem. Geol. 2008, 257, 34–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Wu, C.L.; Gao, Y.H.; Lei, M.; Qin, H.P.; Liu, C.H.; Li, M.Z.; Frost, B.R.; Wooden, J.L. Zircon SHRIMP U-Pb Dating, Lu-Hf isotopic characteristics and petrogenesis of the Palaeozoic granites in Mangya Area, southern Altun, NW China. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2014, 30, 2297–2323. [Google Scholar]
  56. Middlemost, E.A.K. Naming materials in the magma/igneous rock system. Earth-Sci. Rev. 1994, 37, 215–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Li, Y.J.; Luan, X.D.; Fu, G.M.; Li, Z.C. Lithogeochemical Features of Granitiods from the Northern Area of Weihe River in Tianshui, Gansu Province. Geol. Sci. Technol. Inf. 2005, 24, 37–44. [Google Scholar]
  58. Maniar, P.D.; Piccoli, P.M. Tectonic discrimination of granitoids. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 1989, 101, 635–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Zhao, J.Q.; Zhou, Z.H.; Ouyang, H.G.; Chen, B.Q.; Liu, W.J.; Yang, F. Zircon U-Pb age and geochemistry of quartz syenite porphyry in Shuangjianzishan Ag-Pb-Zn (Sn) deposit, Inner Mongolia, and their geological implications. Miner. Depos. 2022, 41, 324–344. [Google Scholar]
  60. Gu, Y.C.; Chen, R.Y.; Jia, B.; Ju, N. Zircon U-Pb dating and geochemistry of the granite porphyry from the Shuangjianzishan silver polymetallic deposit in Inner Mongolia and tectonic implications. Geol. Explor. 2017, 53, 495–507. [Google Scholar]
  61. Sun, S.S.; McDonough, W.F. Chemical and Isotopic Systematics of Oceanic Basalts: Implications for Mantle Composition and Processes. In Magmatism in the Ocean Basins; Saunders, A.D., Norry, M.J., Eds.; Geological Society of London Special Publication: Brassmill Lane, UK, 1989. [Google Scholar]
  62. Amelin, Y.; Lee, D.C.; Halliday, A.N. Early-middle archaean crustal evolution deduced from Lu-Hf and U-Pb isotopic studies of single zircon grains. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2000, 64, 4205–4225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Chen, G.Z.; Wu, G.; Li, Y.L.; Li, T.G.; Liu, R.L.; Li, R.H.; Yang, F. Zircon U-Pb Age and Geochemistry of the Qianjinchang Intrusion in the Southern Great Xing’an Range and its Geological Implications. Geotecton. Metallog. 2022, 46, 356–379. [Google Scholar]
  64. Chen, G.Z.; Wu, G.; Li, T.G.; Liu, R.L.; Li, R.H.; Li, Y.L.; Yang, F. Mineralization of the Daolundaba Cu-W-Sn deposit in the southern Great Xing’an Range: Constraints from zircon and monazite U-Pb and sericite 40Ar-39Ar Ages. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2021, 37, 865–885. [Google Scholar]
  65. Frost, B.R.; Barnes, C.G.; Collins, W.J.; Arculus, R.J.; Ellis, D.J.; Frost, C.D. A Geochemical Classification for Granitic Rocks. J. Petrol. 2001, 42, 2033–2048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Wu, F.Y.; Sun, D.Y.; Lin, Q. Petrogenesis of the Phanerozoic granites and crustal growth in Northeast China. Acta Petrol. Sin. 1999, 15, 181–189. [Google Scholar]
  67. Xu, B.L.; Yan, G.H.; Zhang, C.; Li, Z.T.; He, Z.F. Petrological Subdivision and Source Material of A-Type Granites. Earth Sci. Front. 1998, 3, 113–124. [Google Scholar]
  68. Wu, F.Y.; Li, X.H.; Yang, J.H.; Zheng, Y.F. Discussions on the petrogenesis of granites. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2007, 23, 1217–1238. [Google Scholar]
  69. Frost, C.D.; Frost, B.R. On Ferroan (A-type) Granitoids: Their Compositional Variability and Modes of Origin. J. Petrol. 2011, 52, 39–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Bu, T.; Wang, G.Q.; Huang, B.T.; Dong, Z.C.; Guo, L. Neoproterozoic A-type granites in northern Beishan Orogenic Belt: Early response of the Rodinia supercontinent beak-up. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2022, 38, 2988–3002. [Google Scholar]
  71. Cheng, Z.G.; Zhang, Z.C.; Santosh, M.; Zhao, Z.Y.; Chen, L.L. Late Carboniferous to early Permian partial melting of the metasedimentary rocks and crustal reworking in the Central Asian Orogenic Belt: Evidence from garnet-bearing rhyolites in the Chinese South Tianshan. Lithos 2017, 282–283, 373–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Whalen, J.B.; Currie, K.L.; Chappell, B.W. A-type granites: Geochemical characteristics, discrimination and petrogenesis. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1987, 95, 407–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Breiter, K.; Gardenová, N.; Kanický, V.; Vaculovič, T. Gallium and germanium geochemistry during magmatic fractionation and post-magmatic alteration in different types of granitoids: A case study from the Bohemian Massif (Czech Republic). Geol. Carpathica 2013, 64, 171–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Liu, C.S.; Chen, X.M.; Chen, P.R.; Wang, R.C.; Hu, H. Subdivision, Discrimination Criteria and Genesis for A-Type Rock Suites. Geol. J. China Univ. 2003, 4, 573–591. [Google Scholar]
  75. Watson, E.B.; Harrison, T.M. Zircon saturation revisited: Temperature and composition effects in a variety of crustal magma types. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1983, 64, 295–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Štemprok, M. A Comparison of the Krušné hory-Erzgebirge (Czech Republic-Germany) and Cornish (UK) granites and their related mineralisation. Proc. Ussher Soc. 1995, 8, 347–356. [Google Scholar]
  77. Breiter, K.; Müller, A.; Leichmann, J.; Gabašová, A. Textural and chemical evolution of a fractionated granitic system: The Podlesí stock, Czech Republic. Lithos 2005, 80, 323–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Zhu, J.C.; Zhang, P.H.; Xie, C.F.; Zhang, H.; Yang, C. Zircon U-Pb age framework of Huashan-Guposhan intrusive belt, western part of Nanling Range, and its geological significance. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2006, 22, 2270–2278. [Google Scholar]
  79. Chen, Y.X.; Li, H.; Sun, W.D.; Ireland, T.; Tian, X.F.; Hu, Y.B.; Yang, W.B.; Chen, C.; Xu, D.R. Generation of Late Mesozoic Qianlishan A2-type granite in Nanling Range, South China: Implications for Shizhuyuan W-Sn mineralization and tectonic evolution. Lithos 2016, 266–267, 435–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Liu, P.; Mao, J.W.; Santosh, M.; Bao, Z.A.; Zeng, X.J.; Jia, L.H. Geochronology and petrogenesis of the Early Cretaceous A-type granite from the Feie’shan W-Sn deposit in the eastern Guangdong Province, SE China: Implications for W-Sn mineralization and geodynamic setting. Lithos 2018, 300–301, 330–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Li, X.H.; Li, W.X.; Li, Z.X. Re-discussion on the genetic types and tectonic significance of the Early Yanshanian granites in Nanling. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2007, 9, 981–991. [Google Scholar]
  82. Qiu, Z.W.; Yan, Q.H.; Li, S.S.; Wang, H.; Tong, L.X.; Zhang, R.Q.; Wei, X.P.; Li, P.; Wang, L.M.; Bu, A.; et al. Highly fractionated Early Cretaceous I-type granites and related Sn polymetallic mineralization in the Jinkeng deposit, eastern Guangdong, SE China: Constraints from geochronology, geochemistry, and Hf isotopes. Ore Geol. Rev. 2017, 88, 718–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Xu, B.; Jiang, S.Y.; Luo, L.; Zhao, K.D.; Ma, L. Origin of the granites and related Sn and Pb-Zn polymetallic ore deposits in the Pengshan district, Jiangxi Province, South China: Constraints from geochronology, geochemistry, mineral chemistry, and Sr-Nd-Hf-Pb-S isotopes. Miner. Depos. 2017, 52, 337–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Wu, F.Y.; Guo, C.L.; Hu, F.Y.; Liu, X.C.; Zhao, J.X.; Li, X.F.; Qin, K.Z. Petrogenesis of the highly fractionated granites and their mineralizations in Nanling Range, South China. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2023, 39, 1–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Liu, R.L.; Wu, G.; Li, T.G.; Chen, G.Z.; Wu, L.W.; Zhang, P.C.; Zhang, T.; Jiang, B.; Liu, W.Y. LA-ICP-MS cassiterite and zircon U-Pb ages of the Weilasituo tin polymetallic deposit in the southern Great Xing’an Range and their geological significance. Earth Sci. Front. 2018, 25, 183–201. [Google Scholar]
  86. Neiva, A.M.R. Portuguese granites associated with Sn-W and Au mineralizations. Bull. Geol. Soc. Finl. 2002, 74, 79–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Yokart, B.; Barr, S.M.; Williams-Jones, A.E.; Macdonald, A.S. Late-stage alteration and tin–tungsten mineralization in the Khuntan Batholith, northern Thailand. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2003, 21, 999–1018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Cheng, C.B.; Mao, J.W. Age and geochemistry of granites in Gejiu area, Yunnan province, SW China: Constraints on their petrogenesis and tectonic setting. Lithos 2010, 120, 258–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Breiter, K. Nearly contemporaneous evolution of the A- and S-type fractionated granites in the Krušné hory/Erzgebirge Mts., Central Europe. Lithos 2012, 151, 105–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Guo, C.L.; Chen, Y.C.; Zeng, Z.L.; Lou, F.S. Petrogenesis of the Xihuashan granites in southeastern China: Constraints from geochemistry and in-situ analyses of zircon U-Pb-Hf-O isotopes. Lithos 2012, 148, 209–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Cheng, Y.B.; Mao, J.W.; Chang, Z.S.; Pirajno, F. The origin of the world class tin-polymetallic deposits in the Gejiu district, SW China: Constraints from metal zoning characteristics and 40Ar–39Ar geochronology. Ore Geol. Rev. 2013, 53, 50–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Yang, J.H.; Peng, J.T.; Hu, R.Z.; Bi, X.W.; Zhao, J.H.; Fu, Y.Z.; Shen, N.P. Garnet geochemistry of tungsten-mineralized Xihuashan granites in South China. Lithos 2013, 177, 79–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Huang, L.C.; Jiang, S.Y. Highly fractionated S-type granites from the giant Dahutang tungsten deposit in Jiangnan Orogen, Southeast China: Geochronology, petrogenesis and their relationship with W-mineralization. Lithos 2014, 202–203, 207–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Ishihara, S.; Terashima, S. The tin content of the Japanese granitoids and its geological significance on the Cretaceous magmatism. J. Geol. Soc. Jpn. 1977, 83, 657–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Taylor, J.R.; Wall, V.J. Cassiterite solubility, tin speciation, and transport in a magmatic aqueous phase. Econ. Geol. 1993, 88, 437–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Wang, C.Y. Lead-Zinc Polymetallic Metallogenic Series and Prospecting Direction of Huanggangliang-Ganzhuermiao Metallogenic Belt, Inner Mongolia. Ph.D. Thesis, Jilin University, Changchun, China, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  97. Miller, C.F.; McDowell, S.M.; Mapes, R.W. Hot and cold granites? Implications of zircon saturation temperatures and preservation of inheritance. Geology 2003, 31, 529–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Liu, F.; Tian, J.X.; An, B.Z.; Zhao, D.S. Geochemistry and tectonic implication of monzonitic granite in the Hansumu area in the south section of the Da Hinggan Mountains. Geol. Explor. 2019, 55, 1404–1415. [Google Scholar]
  99. Wu, F.Y.; Jahn, B.M.; Lin, Q. Isotopic Characteristics of Post-Orogenic Granites in Orogens of Northern China and Their Significance for Crustal Growth. Chin. Sci. Bull. 1998, 43, 420–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Hong, D.W.; Wang, S.; Xie, X.L.; Zhang, J.S. Genesis of Positive ε(Nd,t) Granitoids in the Da Hinggan Mts.-Mongolia Orogenic Belt and Growth of Continental Crust. Earth Sci. Front. (Chin. Univ. Geosci.) 2000, 7, 441–456. [Google Scholar]
  101. Wu, F.Y.; Jahn, B.M.; Wilde, S.A.; Lo, C.H.; Yui, T.F.; Lin, Q.; Ge, W.C.; Sun, D.Y. Highly fractionated I-type granites in NE China (II): Isotopic geochemistry and implications for crustal growth in the Phanerozoic. Lithos 2003, 67, 191–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Chen, C.C.; Tang, Z.Y.; Feng, Z. Petrogenesis of Early Cretaceous Trachyandesite-Andesite in Suolun Area, Great Xing’an Range: Constraints from Geochemistry and Sr-Nd-Hf Isotopes. J. Jilin Univ. (Earth Sci. Ed.) 2025, 15, 693. [Google Scholar]
  103. Sui, Z.M.; Xu, X.C. Sr-Nd isotopic characteristics of Jurassic granites in northeastern Da Hinggan Mountains and their geological implications. Geol. China 2010, 37, 48–55. [Google Scholar]
  104. Zhang, P.; Zhao, Y.; Kou, L.L.; Sha, D.M.; Bi, Z.W.; Yang, F.C. Zircon U-Pb Ages, Hf Isotopes and Geological Significance of Mesozoic Granites in Dandong Area, Liaodong Peninsula. Earth Sci. 2019, 44, 3297–3313. [Google Scholar]
  105. Meng, Q.R. What drove Late Mesozoic extension of the northern China-Mongolia tract? Tectonophysics 2003, 369, 155–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Wu, F.Y.; Sun, D.Y.; Li, H.M.; Jahn, B.M.; Wilde, S. A-type granites in northeastern China: Age and geochemical constraints on their petrogenesis. Chem. Geol. 2002, 187, 143–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. He, P.; Guo, S.; Su, H. Geochronology, geochemistry and tectonic setting of volcanic rocks from Bai-yingaolao Formation in Changtuxili area, southern Da Hinggan Mountains. N. China Geol. 2024, 47, 16–27. [Google Scholar]
  108. Zhang, L.Q.; Shao, J.A.; Zheng, G.R. Metamorphic Core Complex in Ganzhuermiao, Inner Mongolia. Sci. Geol. Sin. 1998, 33, 140–146. [Google Scholar]
  109. Zhu, D.C.; Mo, X.X.; Zhao, Z.D.; Niu, Y.L.; Pan, G.T.; Wang, L.Q.; Liao, Z.L. Permian and Early Cretaceous tectonomagmatism in southern Tibet and Tethyan evolution: New Perspective. Earth Sci. Front. 2009, 16, 1–20. [Google Scholar]
  110. Wu, F.Y.; Liu, X.C.; Ji, W.Q.; Wang, J.M.; Yang, L. Highly fractionated granites: Recognition and research. Sci. China Earth Sci. 2017, 60, 1201–1219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Zhou, H.Z.; Wei, J.H.; Shi, W.J.; Zhang, S.T.; Chen, J.J.; Zhang, X.M.; Shen, Z.Y.; Wang, Y.L.; Zeng, R.L. Late Triassic post-collision extension at Elashan magmatic belt, East Kunlun Orogenic Belt: Insights from Suolagou highly fractionated I-type granite. Bull. Geol. Sci. Technol. 2020, 39, 150–164. [Google Scholar]
  112. Zhang, J.T.; Yang, J.; Liu, L.L.; Ke, X.; Hu, Z.Y.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y.Y. The Geochemical Characteristics and Geological Significance of the Early Yanshanian Uranium-producing Hedong Pluton in Northwest Guangdong Province. Uranium Geol. 2024, 40, 1118–1131. [Google Scholar]
  113. Searle, M.P.; Parrish, R.R.; Hodges, K.V.; Hurford, A.; Ayres, M.W.; Whitehouse, M.J. Shisha Pangma leucogranite, south Tibetan Himalaya: Field relations, geochemistry, age, origin, and emplacement. J. Geol. 1997, 105, 295–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Wu, G.; Sun, F.Y.; Zhao, C.S.; Li, Z.T.; Zhao, A.L.; Pang, Q.B.; Li, G.Y. Discovery of the Early Paleozoic post-collision granites in the northern margin of the Erguna Block and their geological significance. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2005, 50, 2733–2743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Cui, Y.B.; Wang, K.; He, F.B.; Yin, G.W.; Wang, Z.L.; Wang, G.L.; She, S.K. Geochronology and geochemical characteristics of volcanic rocks from the Manitu Formation in the Qilibin area, northern Great Xing’an Range and its geological significance. Acta Geol. Sin. 2021, 95, 3301–3316. [Google Scholar]
  116. Chen, Y.X.; Liu, W.H.; Wang, K.X.; Liu, X.D.; Sun, L.Q.; Yin, D.H. Petrogenesis and Tectonic Implications of the Zhongpai Fine-grained Granite in Qingshanbao, Gansu: Constraints from Geochemistry and Zircon U-Pb Chronology. Geoscience 2024, 38, 169–182. [Google Scholar]
  117. Küster, D.; Harms, U. Post-collisional potassic granitoids from the southern and northwestern parts of the Late Neoproterozoic East African Orogen: A review. Lithos 1998, 45, 177–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Zorin, Y.A. Geodynamics of the western part of the Mongolia-Okhotsk collisional belt, Trans-Baikal region (Russia) and Mongolia. Tectonophysics 1999, 306, 33–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Structure and Evolution of the Mongol-Okhotsk Orogenic Belt. Available online: https://xueshu.baidu.com/usercenter/paper/show?paperid=a1d02969ac5e515c20ece13661afab73&site=xueshu_se (accessed on 28 July 2025).
  120. Yang, Y.T.; Guo, Z.X.; Song, C.C.; Li, X.B.; He, S. A short-lived but significant Mongol-Okhotsk collisional orogeny in latest Jurassic-earliest Cretaceous. Gondwana Res. 2015, 28, 1096–1116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Wang, T.; Tong, Y.; Xiao, W.J.; Guo, L.; Windley, B.F.; Donskaya, T.; Li, S.; Tserendash, N.; Zhang, J.J. Rollback, scissor-like closure of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean and formation of an orocline: Magmatic migration based on a large archive of age data. Natl Sci Rev 2021, 9, nwab210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Metelkin, D.V.; Vernikovsky, V.A.; Kazansky, A.Y.; Wingate, M.T.D. Late Mesozoic tectonics of Central Asia based on paleomagnetic evidence. Gondwana Res. 2010, 18, 400–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Li, Y.; Ding, L.L.; Xu, W.L.; Wang, F.; Tang, J.; Zhao, S.; Wang, Z.J. Geochronology and geochemistry of muscovite granite in Sunwu area, NE China: Implications for the timing of closure of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2015, 31, 56–66. [Google Scholar]
  124. Wu, L.; Kravchinsky, V.A.; Gu, Y.J.; Potter, D.K. Absolute reconstruction of the closing of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean in the Mesozoic elucidates the genesis of the slab geometry underneath Eurasia. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 2017, 122, 4831–4851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Pei, J.L.; Sun, Z.M.; Liu, J. A paleomagnetic study from the Late Jurassic volcanics (155 Ma), North China: Implications for the width of Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean. Tectonophysics 2011, 510, 370–380. [Google Scholar]
  126. Xu, W.L.; Sun, C.Y.; Tang, J.; Luan, J.P.; Wang, F. Basement Nature and Tectonic Evolution of the Xing’an-Mongolian Orogenic Belt. Earth Sci. 2019, 44, 1620–1646. [Google Scholar]
  127. Fan, W.M.; Guo, F.; Wang, Y.J.; Lin, G. Late Mesozoic calc-alkaline volcanism of post-orogenic extension in the northern Da Hinggan Mountains, northeastern China. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 2003, 121, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Chen, H.C.; Niu, F.L.; Obayashi, M.; Grand, S.P.; Kawakatsu, H.; Chen, Y.J.; Ning, J.Y.; Tanaka, S. Mantle seismic anisotropy beneath NE China and implications for the lithospheric delamination hypothesis beneath the southern Great Xing’an range. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2017, 471, 32–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Zhang, X.; Guo, H.Y.; Wang, W.D.; Xu, J.X.; Li, F.M.; Zhao, W.; Zhang, C.Y. Chronology, geochemistry and tectonic implications of the volcanic rocks of the Manitu Formation in Xinlin area, northern Great Xing’an Range. Chin. J. Geol. 2025, 60, 711–729. [Google Scholar]
  130. Ying, J.F.; Zhou, X.H.; Zhang, L.C.; Wang, F. Geochronological framework of Mesozoic volcanic rocks in the Great Xing’an Range, NE China, and their geodynamic implications. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2010, 39, 786–793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Shao, J.A.; Mu, B.L.; Zhu, H.Z.; Zhang, L.Q. Material source and tectonic settings of the Mesozoic mineralization of the Da Hinggan Mountains. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2010, 26, 649–656. [Google Scholar]
  132. Enkin, R.J.; Yang, Z.Y.; Chen, Y.; Courtillot, V. Paleomagnetic Constraints on the Geodynamic History of the Major Blocks of China from the Permian to the Present. J. Geophys. Res 1992, 97, 13953–13989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Zhao, X.; Coe, R.S.; Gilder, S.A.; Frost, G.M. Palaeomagnetic Constraints on the Palaeogeography of China: Implications for Gondwanaland. Aust. J. Earth Sci. 1996, 43, 643–672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Gou, J. Geochronology, Petrogenesis and Tectonic Setting of Mesozoic Volcanic Rocks, Southern Manzhouli Area, Inner Mongolia. Ph.D. Thesis, Jilin University, Changchun, China, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  135. van der Voo, R.; van Hinsbergen, D.J.J.; Domeier, M.; Spakman, W.; Torsvik, T.H. Latest Jurassic–earliest Cretaceous closure of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean: A Paleomagnetic and Seismological-Tomographic Analysis. In Late Jurassic Margin of Laurasia-A Record of Faulting Accommodating Plate Rotation; Anderson, T.H., Didenko, A.N., Johnson, C.L., Khanchuk, A.I., MacDonald, J.H., Jr., Eds.; Geological Society of America: Boulder, CO, USA, 2015; Volume 513, pp. 589–606. [Google Scholar]
  136. Meng, E.; Xu, W.L.; Yang, D.B.; Qiu, K.F.; Li, C.H.; Zhu, H.T. Zircon U-Pb chronology, geochemistry of Mesozoic volcanic rocks from the Lingquan basin in Manzhouli area, and its tectonic implications. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2011, 27, 1209–1226. [Google Scholar]
  137. Xu, M.J.; Xu, W.L.; Wang, F.; Gao, F.H.; Yu, J.J. Geochronology and geochemistry of the Early Jurassic granitoids in the central Lesser Xing’an Range, NE China and its tectonic implications. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2013, 29, 354–368. [Google Scholar]
  138. Pearce, J.A.; Harris, N.W.; Tindle, A.G. Trace Element Discrimination Diagrams for the Tectonic Interpretation of Granitic Rocks. J. Petrol. 1984, 25, 956–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Harris, N.B.W.; Pearce, J.A.; Tindle, A.G. Geochemical Characteristics of Collision-Zone Magmatism; Geological Society of London, Special Publications: Brassmill Lane, UK, 1986; Volume 19, pp. 67–81. [Google Scholar]
  140. Wang, Y.X.; Zhao, Z.H. Geochemistry and Origin of the Baerzhe REE-Nb-Be-Zr Superlarge Deposit. Geochimica 1997, 26, 24–35. [Google Scholar]
  141. Shi, G.H.; Miao, L.C.; Zhang, F.Q.; Jian, P.; Fan, W.M.; Liu, D.Y. Emplacement age and tectonic implications of the Xilinhot A-type granite in Inner Mongolia, China. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2004, 49, 723–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Ge, W.C.; Wu, F.Y.; Zhou, C.Y.; Zhang, J.H. Zircon U-Pb ages and its significance of the Mesozoic granites in the Wulanhaote region, central Da Hinggan Mountain. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2005, 21, 749–762. [Google Scholar]
  143. Zhu, X.Q.; Zhang, Q.; He, Y.L.; Zhu, C.H.; Huang, Y. Hydrothermal source rocks of the Meng’ entaolegai Ag-Pb-Zn deposit in the granite batholith, Inner Mongolia, China: Constrained by isotopic geochemistry. Geochem. J. 2006, 40, 265–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Bao, Q.Z.; Zhang, C.J.; Wu, Z.L.; Wang, H.; Li, W.; Sang, J.H.; Liu, Y.S. SHRIMP U-Pb Zircon geochronology of a carboniferous quartz-diorite in Baiyingaole area, Inner Mongolia and its implications. J. Jilin Univ. (Earth Sci. Ed.) 2007, 37, 15–23. [Google Scholar]
  145. Liu, W.; Pan, X.F.; Xie, L.W.; Li, H. Sources of material for the Linxi granitoids, the southern segment of the Da Hingan Mts.: When and how continental crust grew? Acta Petrol. Sin. 2007, 23, 441–460. [Google Scholar]
  146. Liu, J.F.; Chi, X.G.; Zhang, X.Z.; Ma, Z.H.; Zhao, Z.; Wang, T.F.; Hu, Z.C.; Zhao, X.Y. Geochemical Characteristic of Carboniferous Quartz Diorite in the Souther Xiwuqi Area, Inner Mongolia and Its Tectonic Significance. Acta Geol. Sin. 2009, 83, 365–376. [Google Scholar]
  147. Liu, Y.F. Metallogenic Study of Bairendaba Ag Polymetallic Deposit in Hexigten Banner, Inner Mongolia. Master’s Thesis, Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, Beijing, China, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  148. Pan, X.F.; Guo, L.J.; Wang, S.; Xue, H.M.; Hou, Z.Q.; Tong, Y.; Li, Z.M. Laser microprobe Ar-Ar dating of biotite from the Weilasituo Cu-Zn polymetallic deposit in Inner Mongolia. Acta Petrol. Mineral. 2009, 28, 473–479. [Google Scholar]
  149. Zhai, D.G.; Liu, J.J.; Wang, J.P.; Peng, R.M.; Wang, S.G.; Li, Y.X.; Chang, Z.Y. Re-Os isotopic chronnology of Molybdenite from the Taipinggou porphyry-type molybdenum deposit in Inner Mongolia and its geological significance. Geoscience 2009, 23, 262–268. [Google Scholar]
  150. Xue, H.M.; Guo, L.J.; Hou, Z.Q.; Tong, Y.; Pan, X.F.; Zhou, X.W. SHRIMP zircon U-Pb ages of the middle Neopaleozoic unmet amorphosed magmatic rocks in the south western slope of the Da Hinggan Mountains, Inner Mongolia. Acta Petrol. Mineral. 2010, 29, 811–823. [Google Scholar]
  151. Zhang, X.J.; Zhang, L.C.; Jin, X.D.; Wu, H.Y.; Xiang, P.; Chen, Z.G. U-Pb ages, geochemical characteristics and their implications of Banlashan molybdenum deposit. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2010, 26, 1411–1422. [Google Scholar]
  152. Zhou, Z.H.; Lü, L.S.; Feng, J.R.; Li, C.; Li, T. Molybdenite Re-Os ages of Huanggang skarn Sn-Fe deposit and their geological significance, Inner Mongolia. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2010, 26, 667–679. [Google Scholar]
  153. Jiang, S.H.; Nie, F.J.; Bai, D.M.; Niu, S.Y.; Wang, B.D.; Liu, Y.F.; Liu, Y. Study on the lead isotopic features of the Baiyinnuoer Pb-Zn deposit in Inner Mongolia. J. Earth Sci. Environ. 2011, 33, 230–236. [Google Scholar]
  154. Guo, Z.J.; Zhou, Z.H.; Li, G.T.; Li, J.W.; Wu, X.L.; Ouyang, H.G.; Wang, A.S.; Xiang, A.P.; Dong, X.Z. SHRIMP U-Pb Zircon dating and petrogeochemistral characteristics of the intermediate-acid intrusive rocks in the Aoergai copper deposit of Inner Mongolia. Geol. China 2012, 39, 1486–1500. [Google Scholar]
  155. Zhai, D.G.; Liu, J.J.; Yang, Y.Q.; Wang, J.P.; Ding, L.; Liu, X.W.; Zhang, M.; Yao, M.J.; Su, L.; Zhang, H.Y. Petrogenetie and metallogentic ages and tectonic setting of the Hanggangiang Fe-Sn deposit, Inner Mongolia. Acta Petrol. Mineral. 2012, 31, 513–523. [Google Scholar]
  156. Zhou, Z.H.; Mao, J.W.; Lyckberg, P. Geochronology and isotopic geochemistry of the A-type granites from the Huanggang Sn–Fe deposit, southern Great Hinggan Range, NE China: Implication for their origin and tectonic setting. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2012, 49, 272–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Liao, Z.; Wang, Y.W.; Wang, J.B.; Li, H.M.; Long, L.L. LA-MC-ICP-MS U-Pb Dating of cassiterite from the Dajing Sn polymetallic deposit and its significance, Inner Mongolia. Miner. Depos. 2012, 28, 2292–2306. [Google Scholar]
  158. Wan, D.; Li, J.F.; Wang, Y.C.; Wang, K.Y.; Wang, Z.G.; Wei, L.M. Re-Os radiometric dating of molybdenite in Hongling Lead-Zinc polymetallic deposit, Inner Mongolia, and its significance. Earth Sci. (J. China Univ. Geosci.) 2014, 39, 687–695. [Google Scholar]
  159. Zhai, D.G.; Liu, J.J.; Zhang, H.Y.; Yao, M.J.; Wang, J.P.; Yang, Y.Q. S-Pb isotopic geochemistry, U-Pb and Re-Os geochronology of the Huanggangliang Fe-Sn deposit, Inner Mongolia, NE China. Ore Geol. Rev. 2014, 59, 109–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Ruan, B.X.; Lv, X.B.; Yang, W.; Liu, S.T.; Yu, Y.M.; Wu, C.M.; Adam, M.M.A. Geology, geochemistry and fluid inclusions of the Bianjiadayuan Pb-Zn-Ag deposit, Inner Mongolia, NE China: Implications for tectonic setting and metallogeny. Ore Geol. Rev. 2015, 71, 121–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Liu, Y.F.; Jiang, S.H.; Bagas, L. The genesis of metal zonation in the Weilasituo and Bairendaba Ag-Zn-Pb-Cu-(Sn-W) deposits in the shallow part of a porphyry Sn-W-Rb system, Inner Mongolia, China. Ore Geol. Rev. 2016, 75, 150–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Liu, L.J.; Zhou, T.F.; Zhang, D.Y.; Yuan, F.; Liu, G.X.; Zhao, Z.C.; Sun, J.D.; White, N. S isotopic geochemistry, zircon and cassiterite u–pb geochronology of the Haobugao Sn polymetallic deposit, southern Great Xing’an Range, NE China. Ore Geol. Rev. 2018, 93, 168–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Zhai, D.G.; Liu, J.J.; Zhang, A.L.; Sun, Y.O. U-Pb, Re-Os, and 40Ar/39Ar geochronology of porphyry Sn±Cu±Mo and polymetallic (Ag-Pb-Zn-Cu) vein mineralization at Bianjiadayuan, Inner Mongolia, Northeast China: Implications for discrete mineralization events. Econ. Geol. 2017, 112, 2041–2059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Chen, G.Z.; Wu, G.; Li, T.G.; Liu, R.L.; Wu, L.W.; Pei, Z.C.; Zhang, T.; Chen, Y.C. LA-ICP-MS Zircon and cassiterite U-Pb ages of Daolundaba copper-tungstentin deposit in Inner Mongolia and their geological significance. Miner. Depos. 2018, 37, 225–245. [Google Scholar]
  165. Gao, X.; Zhou, Z.H.; Breiter, K.; Ouyang, H.G.; Liu, J. Ore-formation mechanism of the Weilasituo tin-polymetallic deposit, NE China: Constraints from Bulk-rock and mica chemistry, He-Ar isotopes, and Re-Os dating. Ore Geol. Rev. 2019, 109, 163–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Yang, F.; Sun, J.G.; Wang, Y.; Fu, J.Y.; Na, F.C.; Fan, Z.Y.; Hu, Z.Z. Geology, Geochronology and Geochemistry of Weilasituo Sn-Polymetallic Deposit in Inner Mongolia, China. Minerals 2019, 9, 104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Mi, K.F.; Lü, Z.C.; Yan, T.J.; Yao, X.F.; Ma, Y.X.; Lin, C.G. Zircon geochronological and geochemical study of the Baogaigou tin deposits, southern Great Xing’an Range, Northeast China: Implications for the timing of mineralization and ore genesis. Geol. J. 2020, 55, 5062–5081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Zhao, Q. Magmatism and Lead-Zinc Mineralization in the Southern Great Xing’an Range, NE China. Ph.D. Thesis, China University of Geosciences, Beijing, China, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  169. Ji, G.Y.; Jiang, S.H.; Li, G.F.; Yi, J.J.; Zhang, L.L.; Liu, Y.F. Metallogenetic Control of Magmatism on the Maodeng Sn-Cu Deposit in the Southern Great Xing’an Range: Evidence from Geochronology, Geochemistry, and Sr-Nd-Pb Isotopes. Geotecton. Metallog. 2021, 45, 681–704. [Google Scholar]
  170. Zhang, J.J. Genetic Study of the Anle Tin Polymetallic Deposit in the Southern Great Xing’an Range. Master’s Thesis, Kunming University of Science and Technology, Kunming, China, 2021. [Google Scholar]
Minerals 15 00813 g001
Figure 1. (a,b) The geological sketch map of the southern Great Xing’an Range and the distribution map of polymetallic deposits (modified from [7]).
Figure 1. (a,b) The geological sketch map of the southern Great Xing’an Range and the distribution map of polymetallic deposits (modified from [7]).
Minerals 15 00813 g001
Minerals 15 00813 g002
Figure 2. Geological sketch map of the study area and sampling locations.
Figure 2. Geological sketch map of the study area and sampling locations.
Minerals 15 00813 g002
Minerals 15 00813 g003
Figure 3. Hand specimens and photomicrographs of granite porphyry (P01) and granodiorite (P02). (a) Hand specimen of granite porphyry (P01); (b) Hand specimen of granodiorite (P02); (c) Photomicrographs of granite porphyry (P01); (d) Photomicrographs of granodiorite (P02). Qtz = Quartz; Pl = Plagioclase; Kfs = K-feldspar; Bt = Biotite.
Figure 3. Hand specimens and photomicrographs of granite porphyry (P01) and granodiorite (P02). (a) Hand specimen of granite porphyry (P01); (b) Hand specimen of granodiorite (P02); (c) Photomicrographs of granite porphyry (P01); (d) Photomicrographs of granodiorite (P02). Qtz = Quartz; Pl = Plagioclase; Kfs = K-feldspar; Bt = Biotite.
Minerals 15 00813 g003
Minerals 15 00813 g004
Figure 4. Cathode luminescence images of granite porphyry P01 (a) and granodiorite P02 (b). The red circle represents the U-Pb age test location and Lu-Hf test location. The value outside the circle is the measurement point number for zircon U-Pb dating.
Figure 4. Cathode luminescence images of granite porphyry P01 (a) and granodiorite P02 (b). The red circle represents the U-Pb age test location and Lu-Hf test location. The value outside the circle is the measurement point number for zircon U-Pb dating.
Minerals 15 00813 g004
Minerals 15 00813 g005
Figure 5. Zircon U-Pb age concordia diagrams and weighted mean age graphs of granite porphyry P01 (a) and granodiorite P02 (b).
Figure 5. Zircon U-Pb age concordia diagrams and weighted mean age graphs of granite porphyry P01 (a) and granodiorite P02 (b).
Minerals 15 00813 g005
Minerals 15 00813 g006
Figure 6. Covariance diagrams of major elements of the granites in the Yexilinhundi region. (a) TAS diagrams (after [56]); (b) SiO2-AR diagrams (after [57]); (c) A/NK-A/CNK diagrams (after [58]). Data source: Biotite adamellite are from [22]; Quartz syenite porphyry are from [59]; Granodiorite are from [60].
Figure 6. Covariance diagrams of major elements of the granites in the Yexilinhundi region. (a) TAS diagrams (after [56]); (b) SiO2-AR diagrams (after [57]); (c) A/NK-A/CNK diagrams (after [58]). Data source: Biotite adamellite are from [22]; Quartz syenite porphyry are from [59]; Granodiorite are from [60].
Minerals 15 00813 g006
Minerals 15 00813 g007
Figure 7. The chondritic-normalized distribution patterns of rare earth elements (a) and the primitive mantle-normalized trace element spider diagrams (b) of granites in the Yexilinhundi region. (normalization values after [61]); the plotting of the curves for the upper crust, middle crust, and lower crust is based on [7]).
Figure 7. The chondritic-normalized distribution patterns of rare earth elements (a) and the primitive mantle-normalized trace element spider diagrams (b) of granites in the Yexilinhundi region. (normalization values after [61]); the plotting of the curves for the upper crust, middle crust, and lower crust is based on [7]).
Minerals 15 00813 g007
Minerals 15 00813 g008
Figure 8. Distribution map of magmatic and mineralization ages in the southern Great Xing’an Range (source of all data: Table A4).
Figure 8. Distribution map of magmatic and mineralization ages in the southern Great Xing’an Range (source of all data: Table A4).
Minerals 15 00813 g008
Minerals 15 00813 g011
Figure 11. (a) Correlation diagrams between Hf isotopic compositions and U-Pb age of zircons of granites in the eastern CAOB (after [104]); (b) Correlation diagrams between Hf isotopic compositions and U-Pb age of zircons of granites in Yexilinhundi region.
Figure 11. (a) Correlation diagrams between Hf isotopic compositions and U-Pb age of zircons of granites in the eastern CAOB (after [104]); (b) Correlation diagrams between Hf isotopic compositions and U-Pb age of zircons of granites in Yexilinhundi region.
Minerals 15 00813 g011
Minerals 15 00813 g012
Figure 12. Granite tectonic environment discriminant diagrams. (a) Rb vs. Y + Nb diagrams (after [138]); (b) Nb vs. Y diagrams (after [138]); (c) Rb/30-Hf-3Ta diagrams (after [139]).
Figure 12. Granite tectonic environment discriminant diagrams. (a) Rb vs. Y + Nb diagrams (after [138]); (b) Nb vs. Y diagrams (after [138]); (c) Rb/30-Hf-3Ta diagrams (after [139]).
Minerals 15 00813 g012
Minerals 15 00813 g013
Figure 13. Tectonic Dynamics Map of Northeastern China and Adjacent Areas in the Late Mesozoic (after [8]). XMOB: Xing’an-Mongolia Orogenic Belt; SC: Siberia Craton; MOO: Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean; NCC: North China Craton; MOS: Mongol-Okhotsk suture; PPO: Paleo-Pacific Ocean; NC-MT: Northern China-Mongolia tract.
Figure 13. Tectonic Dynamics Map of Northeastern China and Adjacent Areas in the Late Mesozoic (after [8]). XMOB: Xing’an-Mongolia Orogenic Belt; SC: Siberia Craton; MOO: Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean; NCC: North China Craton; MOS: Mongol-Okhotsk suture; PPO: Paleo-Pacific Ocean; NC-MT: Northern China-Mongolia tract.
Minerals 15 00813 g013
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

Yue, H.; Yu, H.; Sun, Z.; He, Y.; Guan, M.; Yu, Y.; Chen, X. The Geochronology, Geochemical Characteristics, and Tectonic Settings of the Granites, Yexilinhundi, Southern Great Xing’an Range. Minerals 2025, 15, 813. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15080813

AMA Style

Yue H, Yu H, Sun Z, He Y, Guan M, Yu Y, Chen X. The Geochronology, Geochemical Characteristics, and Tectonic Settings of the Granites, Yexilinhundi, Southern Great Xing’an Range. Minerals. 2025; 15(8):813. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15080813

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yue, Haixin, Henan Yu, Zhenjun Sun, Yanping He, Mengfan Guan, Yingbo Yu, and Xi Chen. 2025. "The Geochronology, Geochemical Characteristics, and Tectonic Settings of the Granites, Yexilinhundi, Southern Great Xing’an Range" Minerals 15, no. 8: 813. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15080813

APA Style

Yue, H., Yu, H., Sun, Z., He, Y., Guan, M., Yu, Y., & Chen, X. (2025). The Geochronology, Geochemical Characteristics, and Tectonic Settings of the Granites, Yexilinhundi, Southern Great Xing’an Range. Minerals, 15(8), 813. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15080813

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