Next Article in Journal
Sedimentary Processes of the Dazhuyuan Formation in Northern Guizhou (Southwest China): Evidence from Detrital Zircon Geochronology and Whole Rock Geochemistry
Previous Article in Journal
Are Geochemical Diagrams Compatible Proxies of the Modal QAP Scheme for Classification/Nomenclature of Granitoid Rocks?
Previous Article in Special Issue
The B-Zone 4611 Silver-Rich Pod—An Unusual Ag-Ge-Sb-As-Ni Assemblage Within the Irish-Type Zn-Pb Silvermines Deposit, County Tipperary, Ireland
 
 
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 11
10.3390/min15111166
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

Geochronology and Geochemistry of the Granite Porphyry in the Zhilingtou Au-Mo-Pb-Zn Polymetallic Deposit, SE China: Implication for Mineralization Mechanism

by
Bo Xing
1,
Kelei Chu
2,*,
Wei Zheng
2,*,
Xiaorong Chen
3,
Gang Qi
3,
Shengli Chen
3 and
Xiang Gao
3
1
Zijin School of Geology and Mining, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350108, China
2
Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, Beijing 100037, China
3
No. 7 Geological Party of Zhejiang Province, Lishui 323000, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Minerals 2025, 15(11), 1166; https://doi.org/10.3390/min15111166
Submission received: 27 September 2025 / Revised: 30 October 2025 / Accepted: 31 October 2025 / Published: 5 November 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Genesis and Evolution of Pb-Zn-Ag Polymetallic Deposits: 2nd Edition)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

The Zhilingtou Au-Mo-Pb-Zn polymetallic deposit is located in the southwestern Zhejiang Province, NE China, and is tectonically situated in the Shaoxing-Longquan uplift belt. Although previous studies have indicated that Au mineralization in this area occurred between 135 Ma and 145 Ma, evidence for coeval intrusive rocks has been lacking. Furthermore, it remains controversial whether the Au mineralization and (~113 Ma) Mo-Pb-Zn mineralization belong to the same magmatic-hydrothermal system. This study conducted comprehensive high-precision geochronological, petrochemical, and Sr-Nd isotopic analyses on the newly discovered granite porphyry intrusion in the mining area. The aim is to constrain the emplacement age of the intrusion, reveal the petrogenesis and source of ore-forming materials, and further discuss the mineralization mechanism. LA-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb dating results indicate that the granite porphyry was formed at 137.8 ± 0.95 Ma, which is broadly consistent with previously reported ages of Au mineralization. It is inferred that this intrusion may be related to a Au mineralization event at around 138 Ma. Geochemical characteristics show that the rock is peraluminous I-type granite, enriched in light rare earth elements (LREEs) and large ion lithophile elements (LILEs) and depleted in high field strength elements (HFSEs) such as Nb, Ta, and Ti, indicating an “island arc-type” geochemical signatures. Sr-Nd isotopic compositions (initial 87Sr/86Sr = 0.712364–0.712711; εNd(t) = −13.9 to −13.4; two-stage Nd model ages TDM2 = 1877–1908 Ma) suggest that the magma was derived from ancient crustal materials with the addition of mantle-derived components. Integrating existing geochronological, isotopic, and fluid inclusion evidence, it is proposed that the Zhilingtou deposit may have experienced two mineralization events: an early event (~138 Ma) involving Au-Ag mineralization related to the granite porphyry and a later event (~113 Ma) comprising Mo-Pb-Zn mineralization associated with a porphyry–epithermal system. Together, these events form a composite mineralization system. This study has important implications for refining regional metallogenic theories and guiding future ore exploration.

1. Introduction

The Southeast Coastal Metallogenic Belt (hereafter referred to as SCMB) in China, spanning the coastal regions of Zhejiang, Fujian, and eastern Guangdong, constitutes an important part of the giant Circum-Pacific metallogenic belt [1]. This belt is characterized by widespread W–Sn–Cu–Mo–Au–Pb–Zn polymetallic deposits closely associated with multi-stage Jurassic to Cretaceous magmatic activities [2,3,4,5,6,7]. Although previous studies have progressively established a spatiotemporal framework of “magmatism–tectonism–mineralization” in the SCMB [2,4,5,8,9,10], the understanding of whether some large-scale polymetallic deposits in the belt have undergone superimposition and modification by multi-stage and multi-source mineralization remains inadequate. This significantly hinders detailed comprehension of the metallogenic mechanisms and restricts the summarization of regional mineralization regularity as well as the exploration for concealed deposits.
The Zhilingtou Au–Mo–Pb–Zn polymetallic deposit is located at the northeastern margin of the SCMB (Figure 1) and tectonically lies in the Shaoxing–Longquan uplift belt of South China Block. The deposit was initially renowned for its Au resources. Subsequent exploration revealed additional mineral resources such as Ag, Pb, Zn, and Mo, ultimately forming a distinctive “three-story” model: the upper part (volcanic rock cover) dominated by Pb–Zn deposits, the middle part (metamorphic rock basement) dominated by Au–Ag and Pb–Zn deposits, and the deep part (intrusive rock mass) dominated by porphyry Mo deposits [11]. Although substantial research has been conducted with fruitful results [11,12,13,14], as a magmatic-hydrothermal deposit [14,15], no intrusions directly corresponding to the previously proposed Au mineralization event at 135–145 Ma have been reported. This lack of evidence has led to ongoing controversy over whether the Au–Ag mineralization and the Mo–Pb–Zn mineralization are genetically related or products of the same magmatic-hydrothermal system, which severely affects the overall understanding of regional metallogeny.
This study identifies a granite porphyry intrusion consistent with the previously reported age of Au mineralization and conducts systematic geochronological, petrochemical, and Sr–Nd isotopic investigations. The aim is to clarify the genetic relationship between Au mineralization and Mo–Pb–Zn mineralization in the Zhilingtou deposit and to establish a deposit model, thereby providing an important case study for understanding the polymetallic mineralization in the SCMB.

2. Geological Setting

The Zhilingtou polymetallic deposit outcrops a basement composed of Paleoproterozoic Badu Group metamorphic rocks (2.4–1.8 Ga), overlain by a Mesozoic Cretaceous cover sequence of volcanic and clastic rocks (140–85 Ma) [18,19,20]. The Badu Group metamorphic series is exposed as “tectonic window” and consists mainly of graphite-bearing garnet biotite-plagioclase gneiss, sillimanite-bearing biotite-plagioclase gneiss, intercalated with K-feldspar-plagioclase gneiss, leptynite, and granulite [14,19]. The overlying Cretaceous strata are dominated by rhyolitic porphyry, tuff, and clastic rocks such as quartz sandstone, siltstone, and shale. The region exhibits well-developed fold and fault structures. Folding is characterized mainly by NE-trending overturned folds, along with composite anticlines and synclines. Fault structures include both ductile shear zones and brittle fractures. The most significant ductile shear zones are the Jiangshan-Shaoxing, the Chatian-Longquan, and the Lingshan-Shangyang shear zones, all generally striking NE to NNE (Figure 1). These shear zones widely exhibit mylonite, boudinage, and rodding structures, reflecting characteristics of multi-stage tectonic overprinting. Brittle faults are oriented mainly NE, NW, and nearly EW, controlling basin development and magma emplacement in the region.
Magmatic activity in the region has been frequent, spanning from the Paleoproterozoic to the Cenozoic, characterized by multiple phases of intrusion and multi-cyclic eruptions, with the Jurassic to Cretaceous intermediate-felsic to felsic magmatism being particularly intense [2]. This period of magmatism can be further divided into a Jurassic and a Cretaceous stage. The early Jurassic represented the peak of magmatic activity in Zhejiang Province, wherein intrusive rocks are sporadically exposed, subvolcanic rocks are generally small in scale, and volcanic rocks are predominantly composed of andesite–dacite–rhyolite assemblages [14,21]. Cretaceous intrusive rocks are widely distributed in southwestern Zhejiang, while volcanic rocks are mainly concentrated in fault-depression basins and various volcanic tectonic basins. The lithology consists largely of granitic and rhyolitic rocks, with minor amounts of felsite, basalt, and diabase [21,22,23].
Southwestern Zhejiang is rich in mineral resources and forms an important part of the northeastern margin of the SCMB (Figure 1), known for its Late Mesozoic polymetallic mineralization. Key ore deposits in the region include Pb, Zn, Au, Ag, Cp, and Mo deposits, as well as non-metallic deposits like fluorite and pyrophyllite, together forming a diverse and genetically associated assemblage of mineral resources.

3. Deposit Geology

The geology of the Zhilingtou deposit comprises Paleoproterozoic Badu Group metamorphic rocks and Jurassic Dashuang Formation intermediate–felsic volcaniclastic rocks, in which the contact is characterized by an angular unconformity or fault (Figure 2). The structural framework of the mining district is complex. It is characterized by basement ductile–brittle shear zones, the central Huafengjian collapse-type caldera (Figure 2), and multiple sets of brittle fractures, which collectively control the spatial distribution of orebodies. The brittle fractures are mainly oriented in NE, NW, and near-NS directions, with the NE- and NW-trending faults serving as the major ore-controlling structures for Au-Ag orebodies.
There are various types of intrusive rocks in the mining area, mainly including granite porphyry, diabase, diorite porphyrite, felsite porphyry and felsite (Figure 2). Among these, granite porphyry is mainly observed in drill cores, appearing light pinkish-red with a porphyritic texture and massive structure. The phenocrysts are predominantly composed of potassium feldspar, plagioclase, quartz, and minor biotite, while the matrix consists of potassium feldspar, quartz, and biotite. The crystallization age of this intrusion is 113.5 ± 0.7 to 110 ± 1 Ma [21,23], indicating its close association with Mo-Pb-Zn mineralization. Felsite porphyry occurs as veins or small stocks intruded along near S-N trending faults (Figure 2). The rock is grayish-white to grayish-brown with a porphyritic texture and massive structure. The phenocrysts are mainly tabular plagioclase, potassium feldspar, and granular quartz, while the matrix exhibits a felsitic texture composed of microcrystalline feldspar and quartz. Felsite is a widely developed dike rock in the mining area, primarily trending northwest-southeast (Figure 2). The rock is generally light grayish-white to light pinkish-red, with a felsitic texture and massive structure. The main minerals are microcrystalline potassium feldspar, plagioclase, and quartz, with very few dark minerals. Some rocks contain minor phenocrysts, giving them a weakly porphyritic texture. These dikes cut through Au-Ag orebodies and early intrusive rocks such as granite porphyry and felsite porphyry (Figure 3). Diabase is commonly found in Huafengjian volcanic rocks or drill cores. The rock is grayish-green with a porphyritic texture, where phenocrysts are mainly plagioclase and biotite (generally <10%). The matrix exhibits a diabase texture composed of microcrystalline plagioclase, amphibole, and biotite. Zircon U-Pb dating gives an age of 103.6 ± 4.2 Ma [21].
The mining area is rich in mineral resources and exhibits a distinct “three-layer” vertical zoning pattern: Pb-Zn and pyrite deposits dominate in the shallow volcanic rocks; gold-silver, lead-zinc, and sulfur deposits develop in the middle metamorphic rock basement; and porphyry Mo deposits are distributed in the deep section [11]. Gold-silver ore bodies primarily occur in the biotite-plagioclase gneiss of the Badu Group, strictly controlled by the basement metamorphic rocks and not extending into the overlying volcanic cap [24]. The ore bodies appear as stockworks and breccias, with metallic minerals including electrum, argentite, pyrite, sphalerite, galena, and minor native gold. Gangue minerals are mainly quartz and rhodonite, and wall-rock alterations include silicification, pyritization, and sericitization. Lead-zinc ore bodies can be divided into two types: one is cryptoexplosive breccia-type, occurring at the edge of the Huafengjian caldera (Figure 3). These ore bodies are pipe-shaped and complex in form, with metallic minerals dominated by sphalerite, galena, and pyrite. Alterations include chloritization, epidotization, and fluoritization. The other type is vein-type lead-zinc deposits, distributed around volcanic conduits and controlled by faults. The ores exhibit disseminated, vein-like, and brecciated structures, with proximal alterations mainly including sericitization, silicification, and chloritization. Molybdenum deposits are found in the southern part of the central ore segment and belong to the porphyry type. They occur as fine-vein disseminations at the contact zone between granite porphyry and metamorphic rocks. Molybdenite is often associated with quartz and potassium feldspar, and alterations include typical potassic alteration, silicification, and sericitization [20].

4. Analytical Methodology

The granite porphyry samples investigated in this study were collected from a drill core in borehole ZK1204 in the Zhilingtou mining area (Figure 2). The samples are relatively fresh, though locally crosscut by quartz-molybdenite veins, accompanied by slight alteration (Figure 4).

4.1. Zircon LA-ICP-MS U-Pb Dating

Zircon mounting and cathodoluminescence (CL) imaging were conducted at Beijing Aojindun Technology Co., Ltd, Beijing, China. Reflected and transmitted light images of the zircons were obtained at the State Key Laboratory of Geological Processes and Mineral Resources, China University of Geosciences (Beijing, China). The rock sample was first crushed, washed, separated by heavy liquids and magnetic methods. Subsequently, zircon grains with intact crystal forms, high transparency, and good color were handpicked under a binocular microscope. The selected grains were mounted in epoxy resin, which was then ground and polished to expose the grain interiors for analysis.
Zircon U-Pb dating analysis was performed using LA-ICP-MS at the Key Laboratory of Metallogeny and Mineral Resource Assessment, Ministry of Natural Resources, Institute of Mineral Resources, Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences. The system consists of a Finnigan Neptune MC-ICP-MS coupled with a NewWave UP213 laser ablation system. The laser ablation conditions were set as follows: spot size of 25 μm, repetition rate of 10 Hz, energy density of approximately 2.5 J/cm2, using helium as the carrier gas. The analytical precision (2σ) for zircon U-Pb isotopic measurements was 2%, and both the accuracy and precision of the dating were around 1% (2σ). The analytical procedure followed that described by Hou et al. [25]. Raw data reduction was performed using the software ICPMSDataCal [26], including signal selection, background subtraction, time-drift correction, and quantitative U-Pb age calculation. Concordia diagrams were plotted using the Isoplot 3.0 program [27].

4.2. Whole-Rock Major and Trace Element Geochemistry

Analysis of whole-rock major and trace elements was conducted at the National Research Center for Geoanalysis, Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences. Major elements were determined by X-ray fluorescence (XRF) spectroscopy using a Philips 3080E spectrometer (Philips, Eindhoven, The Netherlands), with analytical precision better than 5%. Ferric and ferrous iron contents were measured by wet chemical methods (titration). Certified reference materials GSR-1 and GSR-3 were used for quality control during major element analysis. Calibration curves for quantification were established via binary regression using data from 36 reference materials, achieving an analytical accuracy between ±0.01% and 0.2%. Trace elements and REEs were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). The analytical precision was controlled within 5% for elements with concentrations > 10 ppm and within 10% for elements < 10 ppm.

4.3. Whole-Rock Sr-Nd Isotopes

Whole-rock Sr-Nd isotopic analysis was also performed at the National Research Center for Geoanalysis. Purified samples of the granitic porphyry were dissolved using a high-pressure digestion method. An aliquot of 5 mL of the resulting solution was taken and diluted 1000-fold to meet the salinity requirements of the instrument. Trace elements and REEs were analyzed using a PE300D ICP-MS, with an analytical uncertainty of <5%, using GSR-1 as the reference standard. Separation of Sr and Nd was carried out using specific resin chromatography. The purified Sr and Nd fractions were subsequently analyzed for isotopic composition using a multi-collector ICP-MS (MC-ICP-MS, NEPTUNE Plus). Procedural blanks for Sr and Nd during the entire process were 10−9–10−10 g and 5 × 10−11 g, respectively. The ratios of 87Rb/86Sr and 147Sm/144Nd were calculated based on the concentrations of Rb, Sr, Sm, and Nd determined by ICP-MS. Measured Sr and Nd isotopic ratios were normalized to 88Sr/86Sr = 8.37521 (SRM987 standard; [28]) and 146Nd/144Nd = 0.7219 (JMC32 1 standard; [28]), respectively.

5. Results

5.1. Zircon U-Pb Ages

LA-ICP-MS U-Pb dating was performed on 18 zircon grains from the Zhilingtou granite porphyry, with the results listed in Table 1. Most of the analyzed zircon grains exhibit well-developed crystal morphology, and the analytical spots were carefully positioned on zones with clear oscillatory zoning, avoiding fractures and inclusions. All analytical points are tightly clustered on the U-Pb concordia diagram (Figure 5a), indicating high concordance.
Numerous studies have shown that the U and Th contents and Th/U ratios of zircons can effectively indicate their origin [29]. Typically, magmatic zircons are characterized by high Th and U contents, Th/U ratios greater than 0.5, and a significant positive correlation between U and Th. In contrast, metamorphic zircons are characterized by low Th and U contents and low Th/U ratios (<0.1) [29]. Highly variable Th/U ratios often reflect zircon crystallization from a chemically heterogeneous magma. The analyzed zircons in this study have U contents ranging from 40.90 ppm to 660.10 ppm, Th contents from 57.10 ppm to 870.54 ppm, and Th/U ratios between 1.02 and 1.62, all exceeding 0.5. Furthermore, Th and U show a significant positive correlation (Figure 6), consistent with the characteristics of magmatic zircons [29].
On the zircon 206Pb/238U-207Pb/235U concordia diagram (Figure 5a), all analytical points are clustered closely around the concordia curve within a narrow range. This indicates that the analyzed zircons have not experienced significant disturbance by later thermal events, and their U-Pb isotopic system has remained essentially closed, without significant loss or gain of U or Pb. Consequently, the dating results are highly reliable. The 206Pb/238U ages of these points range from 136 Ma to 140 Ma, yielding a weighted mean age of 137.8 ± 0.95 Ma (MSWD = 0.32; Figure 5b), which further confirms the high reliability of the results. Integrated with cathodoluminescence (CL) imaging and elemental characteristics, this age is interpreted as the crystallization age of the granite porphyry, indicating that it formed during an early Early Cretaceous magmatic intrusive event.

5.2. Major and Trace Element Geochemistry

Major, trace, and rare earth element (REE) elements composition of the granite porphyry from the Zhilingtou deposit are presented in Table 2. The rock is characterized by SiO2 contents of 67.91–69.59 wt%, K2O of 3.75–5.84 wt%, total alkalis (Na2O + K2O) of 7.29–8.57 wt%, MgO of 0.67–0.78 wt%, CaO of 1.15–1.60 wt%, with P2O5 and TiO2 ranging from 0.11–0.12 wt% and 0.36–0.39 wt%, respectively. On the K2O vs. SiO2 diagram (Figure 7a), the samples plot in the shoshonitic to high-K calc-alkaline series. The porphyry shows A/CNK (Al2O3/(CaO + Na2O + K2O)) values of 0.98–1.10 and A/NK (Al2O3/(Na2O + K2O)) values of 1.26–1.35, indicating a peraluminous affinity (Figure 7b).
In terms of trace elements, the granitic porphyry exhibits Ba = 818–1274 ppm, Sr = 208–320 ppm, Ni = 2.2–2.8 ppm, Y = 18.9–22.9 ppm, Sr/Y ratios of 11–15, Zr/Hf of 25.0–35.1, and Nb/Ta of 13.1–13.8. Overall, it displays relatively high Sr, high Sr/Y, low Yb, and pronounced negative δEu anomalies (0.47–0.63), suggesting significant plagioclase fractionation during magmatic evolution. The primitive mantle-normalized spider diagram (Figure 8a) shows enrichment in large-ion lithophile elements (LILEs; e.g., Rb, K, Th, U) and depletion in high-field-strength elements (HFSEs; e.g., Nb, Ta, P, Ti), indicative of a subduction-related magmatic affinity [32]. The Rb/Sr ratios of the Zhilingtou granitic porphyry range from 0.33 to 0.98, higher than the average upper crustal value (0.35; [33]). Additionally, the samples have high Th/Ta (22.2–25.6) and Th contents (25.0–26.9 ppm), significantly exceeding the Th abundance of the primitive mantle (0.05 ppm; [34]) and the average for island arc basalts (0.27 ppm; [35]).
The total REE concentrations (∑REE) of the granite porphyry samples range from 213.6 to 279.3 ppm (Table 3). Light REE (LREE) contents vary from 200.2 to 264.0 ppm, whereas heavy REE (HREE) contents range from 13.0 to 15.3 ppm. The LREE/HREE ratios are between 14.9 and 17.5, and (La/Yb)N values range from 21.0 to 27.0, indicating strong LREE enrichment relative to HREE (Figure 8b).

5.3. Whole-Rock Sr–Nd Isotopes

The Sr and Nd isotopic compositions of the Zhilingtou granite porphyry are listed in Table 3. The measured 87Sr/86Sr ratios range from 0.714652 to 0.716759, with no abnormally low ISr values (<0.700), indicating geologically meaningful results. Granites with initial Sr isotopic ratios (ISr or (87Sr/86Sr)i) between 0.706 and 0.719 are generally considered to be derived from crust-mantle mixing sources [38]. Using the crystallization age of t = 138 Ma for the Zhilingtou granitic porphyry, the calculated initial (87Sr/86Sr)i values range from 0.712364 to 0.712711, clearly indicating an isotopic signature characteristic of crust-mantle mixing.
The Zhilingtou granite porphyry has εNd(t) values ranging from −12.36 to −11.89. The corresponding Nd depleted mantle model ages (TDM) are between 1556 Ma and 1623 Ma, and the two-stage model ages (TDM2) range from 1877 Ma to 1908 Ma. These results suggest interaction between mantle-derived magmas and crustal materials, with the magma source being predominantly crustal.

6. Discussion

6.1. Timing of Rock Formation

Previous studies have investigated the timing of magmatism and mineralization at the Zhilingtou deposit. As the deposit was initially recognized for its Au mineralization, early interpretations of its formation age were primarily based on geological field relationships. For instance, Au-bearing quartz veins are strictly hosted within the Precambrian Badu Group metamorphic rocks and do not intrude into the overlying, unaltered Cretaceous volcanic rocks. This relationship indicated that mineralization likely occurred prior to the volcanic activity [24]. With advancements in isotopic geochronology, increasing evidence indicates a genetic link between the Zhilingtong mineralization and Cretaceous magmatism. Molybdenite Re–Os ages [11,13] and sphalerite 40Ar/39Ar ages [14] collectively indicate that the porphyry Mo and Pb–Zn mineralization primarily occurred between 114 and 110 Ma. These ages are consistent with those of the 113.6 ± 0.7 Ma granite porphyry, 113.7 ± 1.6 Ma mineralized volcanic rocks, and the 113.5 ± 0.7 Ma rhyolitic porphyry [21]. This consistency defines a late Early Cretaceous Mo-Pb-Zn mineralization event at Zhilingtou. Building on this chronological framework, Wang et al. [21] further reinforced it by obtaining a Rb–Sr isochron age of 113.1 ± 20.8 Ma for auriferous pyrite, confirming the sphalerite 40Ar/39Ar age (113.9 ± 4 Ma), and determining an age of 113.5 ± 0.7 Ma for the mineralization-associated rhyolitic porphyry. Integrating these results with previous molybdenite Re-Os ages and supporting fluid inclusion and H-O-S-Pb isotopic evidence, Wang et al. [21] proposed that the Au, Ag, Pb, Zn, and Mo orebodies at Zhilingtou belong to a single mineralization system formed during the late Early Cretaceous (ca. 113 Ma). This system comprises a porphyry Mo deposit at depth and an epithermal Au-polymetallic deposit at shallow levels.
High-precision LA-ICP-MS zircon U–Pb dating of the granite porphyry in this study yielded a crystallization age of 137.8 ± 0.95 Ma (Figure 5b), which delineates a new magmatic phase. This age offers direct evidence for early Early Cretaceous magmatism at Zhilingtou. Moreover, it is consistent with a quartz 40Ar/39Ar age of 139 ± 18.6 Ma [12] and falls within the proposed Au mineralization range of 135–145 Ma [15]. It is also broadly comparable, within analytical uncertainty, to the Rb–Sr age of auriferous pyrite reported by Wang et al. [21]. The consistency among these high-precision geochronological results suggests the possible existence of an early Early Cretaceous Au mineralization event in the Zhilingtou deposit.
In addition to the mineralization-related magmatism mentioned above, the Zhilingtou deposit also contains multiple pulses of post-ore intrusive and volcanic rocks. These include diabase (103.6 ± 4.2 Ma; [21]), quartz monzonite (97 ± 1 Ma; [23]), and felsite (102.5 ± 1.6 Ma; [21]), indicating sustained magmatic activity in the region after the main mineralization episode had concluded.
In summary, we proposed that Zhilingtou polymetallic deposit experienced three distinct magmatic pulses and two mineralization events during the Early Cretaceous: (1) An early pulse represented by the ~138 Ma granite porphyry, potentially associated with Au mineralization; (2) A middle pulse comprising the ~114 Ma granite porphyry and contemporaneous volcanic rocks, which collectively controlled the formation of the Mo-Pb-Zn mineralization; and (3) A late pulse involving a series of post-ore intrusions such as diabase, quartz monzonite, and felsite at ~103–97 Ma, marking the termination of the magmatic-hydrothermal system in the region.

6.2. Petrogenesis

The most widely used genetic classification scheme for granitic rocks is the I-, S-, M-, and A-type scheme proposed by Chappell and White [39]. Determining the petrogenetic type requires comprehensive analysis based on mineral assemblage and geochemical characteristics. M-type granites are formed by the differentiation of basaltic magmas [40], such as oceanic plagiogranites within ophiolite suites. The Zhilingtou intrusion belongs to the shoshonitic and high-K calc-alkaline series, distinct from the tholeiitic series, thus clearly precluding an M-type affinity. Therefore, the classification of the Zhilingtou rock focuses on distinguishing between A-type, I-type, and S-type granites. The most effective way to distinguish these three types is the identification of characteristic minerals, such as muscovite, cordierite, tourmaline, alkaline mafic minerals, and hornblende [41]. However, in practice, these diagnostic minerals are often not found, making a series of geochemical characteristics and discrimination diagrams common tools for distinguishing them.
The primary geochemical criteria currently used for identifying S-type granites are: (1) a corundum molecule content greater than 1% in the CIPW norm; (2) an A/CNK ratio > 1.1; (3) the presence of peraluminous characteristic minerals like cordierite, tourmaline, garnet, and muscovite; and (4) a positive correlation between P2O5 and SiO2 contents due to apatite solubility [42]. In contrast, I-type granites are characterized by minerals like hornblende, an A/CNK ratio < 1.1, a negative correlation between P2O5 and SiO2, relatively higher Na2O content compared to S-types, and relative depletions in Sr, Ba, and Eu [43,44]. The main criteria for identifying A-type granites include: (1) FeO*/MgO > 10; (2) 10,000 × Ga/Al > 2.6; (3) Zr + Nb + Ce + Y > 350 ppm and Zr > 250 ppm; and (4) their formation in specific tectonic settings and high zircon saturation temperatures are also often used as indicators [44,45,46,47,48]. Given that highly fractionated granites approach the eutectic point in both mineralogy and chemical composition, their correct classification necessitates integrated evidence from mineralogy, petrology, and geochemistry [39,43,44]. The primary minerals of the Zhilingtou granite porphyry are quartz, biotite, plagioclase, and K-feldspar. Minerals such as cordierite and muscovite were not observed under the microscope, consistent with the mineral assemblage of typical I-type (or ‘syntexis-type’) granites [49]. Although the Zr + Nb + Ce + Y content (418.3–656.4 ppm; Table 2) exceeds the lower limit for A-type granites (350 ppm; [44]), the FeO*/MgO ratio is far less than 10, and the 10,000 × Ga/Al ratio is below the threshold of 2.6—values commonly used to identify A-type granites. Furthermore, depletions in HFSEs (Nb, Ti, Ta) and a weak negative Eu anomaly differ from typical A-type granite characteristics [45,46,50] (Figure 8a,b). The A/CNK values range from 0.98 to 1.1, and A/NK values from 1.26 to 1.35, indicating a peraluminous character. The P2O5 content (0.11%–0.12%) remains essentially constant. The rock has Mg # values of 0.30–0.37, characteristic of I-type granites. The intrusion has low Rb/Sr (0.33–0.98) and Rb/Ba (0.14–0.23) ratios, consistent with the standard values for I-type granites compiled by Whalen et al. [44]. In summary, the Zhilingtou granite porphyry is classified as an I-type granite.

6.3. Nature of the Rock Sources

The genesis of shoshonitic series or potassic alkaline rocks can generally be categorized into two types: (1) interaction between partial melts derived from the asthenospheric mantle and the overlying lithospheric mantle [51]; and (2) partial melting of an enriched metasomatized mantle associated with subduction zones [52]. These correspond to low K/Ti–high Ti and high K/Ti–low Ti types of potassic magmas, respectively [53]. The primary distinction lies in the fact that the former does not exhibit Nb and Ta depletion (Nb/La > 1) and occurs in continental and intra-oceanic settings [54], whereas the latter shows significant Nb and Ta depletion (Nb/La < 1) and is found in subduction- or arc-related tectonic environments. However, since the average Nb/La ratio of the continental crust ranges from 0.5 to 0.8 [55], certain degrees of crustal contamination could also lead to magmas exhibiting Nb-Ta depletion characteristics. The Nb/La ratios of granite porphyry at Zhilingtou (0.22–0.29; Table 2) are significantly lower than the average value for the continental crust (0.7). Moreover, fractional crystallization does not reduce Nb/La ratios, as Nb is more incompatible than La. Therefore, the Zhilingtou granite porphyry displays an “island-arc type” geochemical signature, characterized by enrichment in LILE and depletion in HFSE such as Nb, Ta, and Ti. Additionally, in the tectonic discrimination diagrams for granitic rocks (Figure 9), all granite porphyry samples at Zhilingtou in this study fall within the volcanic arc field. The aforementioned evidence seems to suggest that the granite porphyry formed in a subduction-related tectonic environment. However, this interpretation is inconsistent with the well-established Early Cretaceous intracontinental extensional setting in the study area [1,2,5], since no evidence of contemporaneous subduction or a continental arc exists. Therefore, we concludes that the “island arc-type” geochemical characteristics of the Zhilingtou granite porphyry are not indicative of an active arc but are inherited. These signatures are likely associated with residual fragments of a Jurassic subducted slab. The plausible explanation is that the Early Cretaceous extension triggered the partial melting of a lithospheric mantle that had been previously metasomatized by fluids/melts from paleo-Pacific Plate subduction [56,57]. This process generated magmas that carried the inherited "island arc-type" fingerprint, despite the contemporaneous intracontinental rifting setting.
Research has shown that different geochemical reservoirs exhibit significant variations in their initial 87Sr/86Sr ratio [(87Sr/86Sr)i] ratios, which is of great importance for tracing material sources, crust-mantle interactions, and the evolution of crustal and mantle materials. The Rb/Sr ratio of mantle-derived materials is much lower than that of the crust; therefore, the(87Sr/86Sr)i of mantle-derived materials [38] is significantly lower than that of the continental crust. The (87Sr/86Sr)i ratio of stony meteorites (0.689–0.700) is generally regarded as the starting point for the evolution of both terrestrial and meteoritic Sr [58]. The (87Sr/86Sr)i ratio of modern oceanic basalts ranges from 0.702 to 0.706, representing the source region of the magmatic upper mantle with little or no crustal influence. The average (87Sr/86Sr)i ratio of the continental crust is 0.719 [38]. As mentioned earlier, the Au-related granite porphyry at Zhilingtou formed at approximately 138 Ma, with whole-rock (87Sr/86Sr)i ratios ranging from 0.712364 to 0.712711 (Table 3). These values clearly indicate an isotopic composition characteristic of a crust-mantle mixed source. The εNd(t) values of the Zhilingtou granite porphyry range from −13.9 to −13.4, with corresponding TDM model ages of 1556–1623 Ma and TDM2 model ages of 1877–1908 Ma, suggesting significant involvement of ancient crustal materials in the magma source.
Minerals 15 01166 g009
Figure 9. Tectonic discrimination diagrams for the Zhilingtou pluton: (a) Y vs. Nb; (b) (Y + Nb) vs. Rb; (c) (Ta + Yb) vs. Rb; (d) Yb vs. Ta (after [59]). Abbreviations: COLG—Syn-collisional granite; VAG—Volcanic arc granite; WPG—Within-plate granite; ORG—Ocean ridge granite.
Figure 9. Tectonic discrimination diagrams for the Zhilingtou pluton: (a) Y vs. Nb; (b) (Y + Nb) vs. Rb; (c) (Ta + Yb) vs. Rb; (d) Yb vs. Ta (after [59]). Abbreviations: COLG—Syn-collisional granite; VAG—Volcanic arc granite; WPG—Within-plate granite; ORG—Ocean ridge granite.
Minerals 15 01166 g009
Nd isotopes are highly resistant to weathering and alteration and are less affected by magmatic differentiation and evolution. Thus, their composition can be effectively used to decipher crustal evolution processes and the nature of magma source regions [60]. The εNd(t) value represents the deviation of the initial 143Nd/144Nd ratio of a rock at the time of its formation from that of the primitive undepleted mantle. Studies have shown that older rocks tend to have more negative εNd(t) values. Such isotopic characteristics are typically recorded in felsic magmas formed by partial melting of deep crustal materials or assimilation of mantle-derived magmas. In the εNd(t) vs. (87Sr/86Sr)i diagram (Figure 10), the data points of the Zhilingtou granite porphyry indicate a crust-mantle mixed source for the magma, with a possible predominance of crustal components. Most scholars currently believe that the identification of multiple granites with low Nd model ages in the South China crust is an important indicator of mantle material involvement in rock formation [16]. The two-stage Nd model ages (TDM2) of the Zhilingtou granite porphyry in this study are concentrated in the range of 1877–1908 Ma, slightly lower than the Nd model ages of the basement metamorphic rocks in the Cathaysia Block (mainly 1.8–2.2 Ga). This suggests the addition of a small amount of mantle-derived components during the rock-forming process, resulting in a lower crustal residence age for the granite porphyry.

6.4. Implications for Mineralization Mechanism

Based on geochronological evidence for the intrusion and ore formation in the Zhilingtou deposit, the mineralization events can be divided into an early Early Cretaceous Au-Ag event and a late Early Cretaceous Mo-Pb-Zn event, each characterized by distinct mineralization mechanisms and fluid evolution patterns.
As discussed earlier, an Au mineralization event likely occurred at Zhilingtou during the early Early Cretaceous (approximately 137–145 Ma). This event shows a possible link to the contemporaneous emplacement of peraluminous I-type granite porphyry (~138 Ma), implying a possible genetic relationship. Research indicates that the ore-forming materials were primarily derived from the Precambrian Badu Group metamorphic rocks, which have significantly higher background values of Au and Ag than the average crustal abundance, constituting an important source [12]. This ancient metamorphic sequence is recognized as a crucial material basis for Au deposit formation in several metallogenic provinces of eastern China [62]. The emplacement of the granite porphyry provided a critical heat source, facilitating the mobilization and migration of Au from the Badu Group. S and Pb isotopic results suggest a mixed crust-mantle source for the ore-forming materials, with a predominance of crustal components [11,21]. The ore-forming fluid was initially a magmatic-derived, medium- to high-temperature, intermediate- to low salinity hydrothermal solution. Later mixing with meteoric water [14] led to simultaneous decreases in temperature and salinity [24]. The mineralization mechanism was dominated by fluid boiling and mixing, triggering rapid Au precipitation in zones of abrupt pressure drop, such as extensional structural belts. Overall, the Zhilingtou Au-Ag mineralization experienced the entire process from heat-driven activation and fluid migration to metal deposition caused by changes in physical and chemical conditions.
Previous geochronological and S-Pb isotopic geochemical studies indicate that the Mo-Pb-Zn mineralization at Zhilingtou occurred during the late Early Cretaceous (~113 Ma; [21,23]) and is closely related to contemporaneous metaluminous-peraluminous A2-type granite porphyry [14,21,23,63]. During this period, the region was still in an extensional tectonic setting [23]. Upwelling of the asthenosphere led to partial melting of a late Paleoproterozoic basement in the lower crust, and the resulting basaltic magma underplated the lower crust, triggering extensive melting of the middle-lower crust and forming felsic magma chambers rich in water and ore-forming components [23,64]. The early felsic magma was shielded and stagnated, whereas later, some basaltic magma breached the felsic magma layer and mixed with it, ultimately evolving into granitic magma. During the late stages of differentiation, this magma exsolved a high-temperature, high-salinity, high-oxygen fugacity, and F-rich H2O-NaCl fluid [20,65]. This fluid, carrying large amounts of metallic elements, migrated upwards. Fluid boiling at the top of the porphyry intrusion and in peripheral fractures caused precipitation of Mo, forming deep porphyry Mo orebodies accompanied by potassic and phyllic alteration [20]. Part of the ore-forming fluid continued to migrate upwards. One branch ascended along cryptoexplosive breccia pipes formed by earlier volcanic activity, forming breccia-type Pb-Zn mineralization. Another branch migrated along fault systems, mixing at shallow levels with heated circulating meteoric water to form a medium- to low-temperature (250–390 °C), intermediate to—low-salinity (0–12 wt% NaCl equivalent) hydrothermal system. This led to the precipitation of Pb and Zn in vein-type orebodies within the fault zones [63]. The Pb-Zn mineralization was controlled by a combination of fluid mixing, temperature decrease, and water-rock reactions [63]. Ultimately, the Zhilingtou deposit constitutes a spatially, temporally, and genetically linked porphyry-epithermal mineralization system.
In summary, the Zhilingtou Au-Mo-Pb-Zn polymetallic deposit is a composite mineralization system closely related to a back-arc extensional environment under the subduction of the Pacific Plate. The early Early Cretaceous Au-Ag mineralization may have primarily relied on the activation, migration, and precipitation of ore-forming elements from the country rocks driven by magmatic heat. In contrast, the late Mo-Pb-Zn mineralization was directly supplied with materials and energy by the magmatic-hydrothermal system. These two mineralization events are both linked and relatively independent in time, space, and genesis, collectively forming a composite deposit model with vertical and lateral zonation. This model holds significant reference value for the exploration of similar mineralization systems within the region.

7. Conclusions

(1) This study presents the identification and precise determination of the emplacement age of the granite porphyry in the Zhilingtou polymetallic deposit as 137.8 ± 0.95 Ma (early Early Cretaceous). This rock is classified as peraluminous I-type granite. Its geochemical characteristics indicate enrichment in LREE and LILE and depletion in HREE and HFSE, suggesting an inherited arc signature.
(2) The whole-rock Sr-Nd isotopic compositions show (87Sr/86Sr)i ratios of 0.712364–0.712711 and εNd(t) values ranging from −12.36 to −11.89. The corresponding crustal model ages (TDM2) are 1877–1908 Ma, suggesting that the magma was derived primarily from ancient crustal materials with the involvement of mantle-derived components.
(3) The Zhilingtou deposit may have been formed by two independent magmatic-hydrothermal mineralization events: an early Au mineralization event (~138 Ma) that may be related to the intrusion of the granite porphyry and a late event (~113 Ma) characterized by Mo-Pb-Zn mineralization associated with a porphyry to epithermal hydrothermal system. These two events are spatially, temporally, and genetically linked yet relatively independent, collectively forming a composite mineralization system.

Author Contributions

B.X., K.C. and W.Z. conceived this contribution and conducted all analytical work. The manuscript was written by B.X., K.C. and W.Z., with contributions from X.C., S.C., G.Q. and X.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 42230807, 41820104010) and the Basic Scientific Research Fund of the Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences [Grant No. YWF201505/6, JYYWF20180601].

Data Availability Statement

Data is contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions, which improved the manuscript. We thank Jiexiong Hua and Weimin Pu for their kind assistance with fieldwork.

Conflicts of Interest

Xiaorong Chen, Gang Qi, Shengli Chen and Xiang Gao are employees of No. 7 Geological Party of Zhejiang Province. The paper reflects the views of the scientists and not the company.

References

  1. Mao, J.W.; Xie, G.Q.; Yuan, S.D.; Liu, P.; Meng, X.Y.; Zhou, Z.H.; Zheng, W. Current research progress and future trends of porphyry-skarn copper and granite related tin polymetallic deposits in the Circum Pacific metallogenic belts. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2018, 34, 2501–2517. [Google Scholar]
  2. Mao, J.W.; Cheng, Y.B.; Chen, M.H.; Pirajno, F. Major types and time-space distribution of Mesozoic ore deposits in South China and their geological settings. Miner. Depos. 2013, 48, 267–294. [Google Scholar]
  3. Mao, J.W.; Ouyang, H.G.; Song, S.W.; Santosh, M.; Yuan, S.D.; Zhou, Z.H.; Zheng, W.; Liu, H.; Liu, P.; Cheng, Y.B.; et al. Geology and metallogeny of tungsten and tin deposits in China. Soc. Econ. Geol. Spec. Publ. 2019, 22, 411–482. [Google Scholar]
  4. Mao, J.W.; Zheng, W.; Xie, G.Q.; Lehmann, B.; Goldfarb, R. Recognition of a Middle-Late Jurassic arc-related porphyry copper belt along the southeast China coast: Geological characteristics and metallogenic implications. Geology 2021, 49, 592–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. 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]
  6. Yuan, S.D.; Williams-Jones, A.E.; Romer, R.L.; Zhao, P.L.; Mao, J.W. Protolith-related thermal controls on the decoupling of Sn and W in Sn-W metallogenic province: Insights from the Nanling region, China. Econ. Geol. 2019, 114, 1005–1012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhao, P.L.; Chu, X.; Williams-Jones, A.E.; Mao, J.W.; Yuan, S.D. The role of phyllosilicate partial melting in segregating tungsten and tin deposits in W-Sn metallogenic provinces. Geology 2022, 50, 121–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Mao, J.W.; Franco, P.; Lehmann, B.; Luo, M.C.; Berzina, A. Distribution of porphyry deposits in the Eurasian continent and their corresponding tectonic settings. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2014, 79, 576–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. 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]
  10. Zhao, P.L.; Yuan, S.D.; Williams-Jones, A.E.; Romer, R.L.; Yan, C.; Song, S.W.; Mao, J.W. Temporal separation of W and Sn mineralization by temperature-controlled incongruent melting of a single protolith: Evidence from the Wangxianling area, Nanling region, South China. Econ. Geol. 2022, 117, 667–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Chu, K.L.; Chen, X.R.; Qi, G.; Gao, X.; Hu, B.; Li, S.J. Sulfur and lead isotope tracing for sources of ore-forming material and ore-forming age of the Zhilingtou Mo-Pb-Zn-Au polymetallic deposit in Zhejiang Province. Acta Geol. Sin. 2020, 94, 2325–2340, (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
  12. Mei, J.M. Typomorphic of quartz from Zhilingtou gold deposit, Suichang, Zhejiang province. Geoscience 2001, 15, 222–225, (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
  13. Zeng, Q.D.; Wang, Y.B.; Zhang, S.; Liu, J.M.; Qin, K.Z.; Yang, J.H.; Sun, W.D.; Qu, W.J. U-Pb and Re–Os geochronology of the Tongcun molybdenum deposit and Zhilingtou gold–silver deposit in Zhejiang Province, southeast China, and its geological implications. Resour. Geol. 2012, 63, 99–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Wang, Y.B. A Study on the Magmatic-Hydrothermal-Epithermal Polymetallic Metallogenic System in the Zhilingtou Deposit, Zhejiang Province. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China, 2014; pp. 1–142. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
  15. Chen, H.S.; Xu, B.T. Mineralization chronology for gold-silver deposits in Zhejiang. Chin. Sci. Bull. 1996, 41, 1107–1110, (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
  16. Zhou, X.M.; Sun, T.; Shen, W.Z.; Shu, L.S.; Niu, Y.L. Petrogenesis of Mesozoic granitoids and volcanic rocks in South China: A response to tectonic evolution. Episodes 2006, 29, 26–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Li, B.; Jiang, S.Y.; Lu, A.H.; Lai, J.Q.; Zhao, K.D.; Yang, T. Petrogenesis of Late Jurassic granobasalt–andesites from Gutian, Fujian Province, South China: Implications for multiple magma sources and origin of porphyry Cu–Mo mineralization. Lithos 2016, 264, 540–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Shu, L.S.; Faure, M.; Yu, J.H.; Jahn, B.M. Geochronological and geochemical features of the Cathaysia block (South China): New evidence for the Neoproterozoic breakup of Rodinia. Precambrian Res. 2011, 187, 263–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Yu, J.H.; O’Reilly, S.Y.; Zhou, M.F.; Griffin, W.L.; Wang, L. U–Pb geochronology and Hf–Nd isotopic geochemistry of the Badu Complex, Southeastern China: Implications for the Precambrian crustal evolution and paleogeography of the Cathaysia Block. Precambrian Res. 2012, 222–223, 424–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Wang, G.G.; Ni, P.; Zhao, C.; Chen, H.; Yuan, H.X. A combined fluid inclusion and isotopic geochemistry study of the Zhilingtou Mo deposit, south China: Implications for ore genesis and metallogenic setting. Ore Geol. Rev. 2017, 81 Pt 2, 884–897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wang, Y.B.; Zeng, Q.D.; Liu, J.M.; Wu, L.; Qin, K.Z. Porphyry Mo and epithermal Au–Ag–Pb–Zn mineralization in the Zhilingtou polymetallic deposit, South China. Miner. Depos. 2020, 55, 1385–1406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. He, Z.Y.; Xu, X.S. Petrogenesis of the Late Yanshanian mantle–derived intrusions in southeastern China: Response to the geodynamics of paleo–Pacific plate subduction. Chem. Geol. 2012, 328, 208–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Liu, H.L.; Mao, J.W.; Duan, S.G.; Yang, C.D.; Bai, Y.L. Geochronology, geochemistry, and Sr–Nd–Hf isotopes of the Cretaceous igneous rocks in the Zhilingtou area, SE China, and their geological significance. Ore Geol. Rev. 2023, 153, 105273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Liu, J.M. Discussion on the genesis of the Zhilingtou Au-Ag deposit. J. Chengdu Coll. Geol. 1990, 17, 1–8, (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
  25. Hou, K.J.; Li, Y.H.; Tian, Y.R. In situ U-Pb zircon dating using laser ablation–multi ion counting-ICP-MS. Miner. Depos. 2009, 28, 481–492, (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
  26. Liu, Y.S.; Gao, S.; Hu, Z.C. 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]
  27. Ludwig, K.R. User’s manual for Isoplot/Ex. Version 3.00: A geochronological toolkit for Microsoft Excel. Berkeley Geochronol. Cent. Spec. Publ. 2003, 4, 1–70. [Google Scholar]
  28. O’Nions, R.K.; Hamilton, P.J.; Evensen, N.M. Variations in 143Nd/144Nd and 87Sr/86Sr ratios in oceanic basalts. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1977, 34, 13–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Hoskin, P.W.O.; Black, L.P. Metamorphic zircon formation by solid-state recrystallization of protolith igneous zircon. J. Metamorph. Geol. 2000, 18, 423–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Le Maitre, R.W. Igneous Rocks: A Classification and Glossary of Terms, 2nd ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2002; pp. 1–236. [Google Scholar]
  31. Maniar, P.D.; Piccoli, P.M. Tectonic discrimination of granitoids. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 1989, 101, 635–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kelemen, P.B.; Hanghø, J.K.; Greene, A.R. One view of the geochemistry of subduction-related magmatic arcs, with an emphasis on primitive andesite and lower crust. Treatise Geochem. 2003, 3, 593–659. [Google Scholar]
  33. Taylor, S.R.; Mclennan, S.M. The geochemical evolution of the continental-crust. Rev. Geophys. 1995, 33, 241–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Sun, S.S. Lead isotopic study of young volcanic rocks from mid-ocean ridges, ocean islands and island arcs. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. 1980, A297, 409–445. [Google Scholar]
  35. Wilson, M. Igneous Petrogenesis; Unwin Hyman: London, UK, 1989; p. 219. [Google Scholar]
  36. Boynton, W.V. Geochemistry of the rare earth elements: Meteorite studies. In Rare Earth Element Chemistry; Henderson, P., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1984; pp. 63–114. [Google Scholar]
  37. 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, Geological Society; Saunders, A.D., Norry, M.J., Eds.; Special Publications: London, UK, 1989; Volume 42, pp. 313–345. [Google Scholar]
  38. Faure, G. Principles of Isotope Geology, 2nd ed.; John Wiley and Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1986; pp. 183–199. [Google Scholar]
  39. Chappell, B.W.; White, A.J.R. Two contrasting granite types. Pac. Geol. 1974, 8, 173–174. [Google Scholar]
  40. White, A.J.R. Sources of granite magmas. Geol. Soc. Am. Abstr. Programs 1979, 11, 539. [Google Scholar]
  41. Wu, F.Y.; Li, X.H.; Yang, J.H.; Zheng, Y.F. Discussion on the petrogenesis of granites. Acta Geol. Sin. 2007, 23, 1217–1238, (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
  42. Chappell, B.W.; White, A.J.R. I- and S-type granites in the Lachlan Fold Belt. Earth Environ. Sci. Trans. R. Soc. Edinb. 1992, 83, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Chappell, B.W. Aluminum saturation in I- and S-type granites and the characterization of fractionated haplogranites. Lithos 1999, 46, 535–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. 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]
  45. Collins, W.J.; Beams, S.D.; White, A.J.R.; Chappell, B.W. Nature and origin of A-type granites with particular reference to Southeastern Australia. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1982, 80, 189–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. 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]
  47. Yang, J.H.; Wu, F.Y.; Chung, S.L.; Wilde, S.A.; Chu, M.F. A hybrid origin for the Qianshan A-type granite, northeast China: Geochemical and Sr-Nd-Hf isotopic evidence. Lithos 2006, 89, 89–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Wong, J.; Sun, M.; Xing, G.F.; Li, X.H.; Zhao, G.C.; Wong, K.; Yuan, C.; Xia, X.P.; Li, L.M.; Wu, F.Y. Geochemical and zircon U-Pb and Hf isotopic study of the Baijuhuajian metaluminous A-type granite: Extension at 125-100 Ma and its tectonic significance for South China. Lithos 2009, 112, 289–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Pitcher, W.S. Granite type and tectonic environment. In Mountain Building Processes; Hsü, K., Ed.; Academic Press: London, UK, 1983; pp. 19–40. [Google Scholar]
  50. Jackson, N.J.; Walsh, J.N.; Pegran, E. Geology, geochemistry and petrogenesis of the late Precambrian granitoids in the Central Hijaz Region of the Arabian Shield. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1984, 87, 205–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Menzies, M. Alkaline rocks and their inclusion: A window on the Earth’s interior. In Alkaline Igneous Rocks; Fitton, J.G., Upton, B.G.J., Eds.; Geological Society Special Publication: London, UK, 1987; Volume 30, pp. 15–27. [Google Scholar]
  52. Wyllie, P.J.; Sekine, T. The formation of mantle phlogopite in subduction zone hybridization. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1982, 79, 375–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Rogers, N.W. Potassic magmatism as a key to trace-element enrichment processes in the upper mantle. J. Volcan. Geother. Res. 1992, 50, 85–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Mttller, D.; Rock, N.M.; Groves, D.I. Geochemical discrimination between shoshonitic and potassic volcanic rocks in different tectonic settings: A pilot study. Miner. Petrol. 1992, 46, 259–289. [Google Scholar]
  55. Rudnick, R.L.; Fountain, D.M. Nature and composition of the continental crust: A lower crustal perspective. Rev. Geophys. 1995, 33, 267–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Zheng, W. The Yanshanian Minerogenetic Series and Mineralization of Polymetallic Deposit in the Yangchun Basin of Yunkai Area, South China; China University of Geosciences: Beijing, China, 2016; pp. 1–298. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  57. Zheng, W.; Mao, J.W.; Pirajno, F.; Zhao, H.J.; Zhao, C.S.; Mao, Z.H.; Wang, Y.J. Geochronology and geochemistry of the Shilu Cu–Mo deposit in the Yunkai area, Guangdong Province, South China and its implication. Ore Geol. Rev. 2015, 67, 382–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Faure, G.; Mensing, T.M. Isotops: Principles and Applications, 3rd ed.; John Wiley and Sons, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2004; pp. 194–213. [Google Scholar]
  59. Pearce, J.A.; Harris, N.B.W.; Tindle, A.G. Trace element discrimination diagrams for the tectonic interpretation of granitic rocks. J. Petrol. 1984, 25, 956–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Whitehouse, M.J. Granulite facies Nd-isotopic homogenization in the Lewisian complex of northwest Scotland. Nature 1988, 331, 705–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Shen, W.Z.; Wang, D.Z.; Liu, C.S. Isotope geochemical characteristics and material sources of tin-bearing porphyries in South China. Acta Geol. Sin. 1995, 69, 349–359, (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
  62. Mao, J.W.; Goldfarb, R.J.; Zhang, Z.W.; Xu, W.Y.; Qiu, Y.M.; Deng, J. Gold deposits in the Xiaoqinling–Xiong’ershan region, Qinling Mountains, central China. Miner. Depos. 2002, 37, 306–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Pu, W.M.; Lei, H.Y.; Zeng, L.; Yang, Y.F. Geological characteristics of concealed explosion Pb-Zn deposit in Zhilingtou area. Nonferrous Met. (Min. Sect.) 2008, 60, 20–24, (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
  64. Huppert, H.E.; Sparks, R.S.J. The Generation of Granitic Magmas by Intrusion of Basalt into Continental Crust. J. Petrol. 1988, 29, 599–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Yuan, S.D.; Williams-Jones, A.E.; Bodnar, R.J.; Zhao, P.L.; Zajacz, Z.; Chou, I.-M.; Mao, J.W. The role of magma differentiation in optimizing the fluid-assisted extraction of copper to generate large porphyry-type deposits. Sci. Adv. 2025, 11, eadr8464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Minerals 15 01166 g001
Figure 1. Geological map of the southeast coast (a) and the distribution of major minerals (b) (modified after Zhou et al. [16]; Li et al. [17]).
Figure 1. Geological map of the southeast coast (a) and the distribution of major minerals (b) (modified after Zhou et al. [16]; Li et al. [17]).
Minerals 15 01166 g001
Minerals 15 01166 g002
Figure 2. Geological map of the Zhilingtou Au-Mo-Pb-Zn polymetallic deposit (modified after [11]).
Figure 2. Geological map of the Zhilingtou Au-Mo-Pb-Zn polymetallic deposit (modified after [11]).
Minerals 15 01166 g002
Minerals 15 01166 g003
Figure 3. The layout of the middle section of the Au-Ag orebodies in the Zhilingtou deposit (modified after [11]).
Figure 3. The layout of the middle section of the Au-Ag orebodies in the Zhilingtou deposit (modified after [11]).
Minerals 15 01166 g003
Minerals 15 01166 g004
Figure 4. Hand specimen and photomicrographs of granite porphyry from the Zhilingtou deposit. (a) Quartz-molybdenite veins cutting through granite porphyry; (b) Porphyritic texture of granite porphyry, with plagioclase as the main phenocrysts and quartz dominating the matrix; Mineral abbreviations: Qz—Quartz; Pl—Plagioclase; Mo—Molybdenite.
Figure 4. Hand specimen and photomicrographs of granite porphyry from the Zhilingtou deposit. (a) Quartz-molybdenite veins cutting through granite porphyry; (b) Porphyritic texture of granite porphyry, with plagioclase as the main phenocrysts and quartz dominating the matrix; Mineral abbreviations: Qz—Quartz; Pl—Plagioclase; Mo—Molybdenite.
Minerals 15 01166 g004
Minerals 15 01166 g005
Figure 5. (a) Zircon U-Pb concordia diagram and (b) weighted mean 206Pb/238U age for the Zhilingtou granitic porphyry.
Figure 5. (a) Zircon U-Pb concordia diagram and (b) weighted mean 206Pb/238U age for the Zhilingtou granitic porphyry.
Minerals 15 01166 g005
Minerals 15 01166 g006
Figure 6. U vs. Th diagram for zircons from the Zhilingtou granite porphyry.
Figure 6. U vs. Th diagram for zircons from the Zhilingtou granite porphyry.
Minerals 15 01166 g006
Minerals 15 01166 g007
Figure 7. (a) K2O vs. SiO2 diagram and (b) A/NK (Al2O3/(Na2O + K2O)) vs. A/CNK (Al2O3/(CaO + Na2O + K2O)) diagram for the Zhilingtou granitic porphyry (after [30] for (a); [31] for (b)).
Figure 7. (a) K2O vs. SiO2 diagram and (b) A/NK (Al2O3/(Na2O + K2O)) vs. A/CNK (Al2O3/(CaO + Na2O + K2O)) diagram for the Zhilingtou granitic porphyry (after [30] for (a); [31] for (b)).
Minerals 15 01166 g007
Minerals 15 01166 g008
Figure 8. Chondrite-normalized primitive mantle-normalized trace element spider diagram (a) and REE distribution pattern (b) for the Zhilingtou granite porphyry (chondrite normalization values after [36]; primitive mantle normalization values after [37]).
Figure 8. Chondrite-normalized primitive mantle-normalized trace element spider diagram (a) and REE distribution pattern (b) for the Zhilingtou granite porphyry (chondrite normalization values after [36]; primitive mantle normalization values after [37]).
Minerals 15 01166 g008
Minerals 15 01166 g010
Figure 10. εNd(t) vs. (87Sr/86Sr)i diagram of the granite porphyry body in the Zhilingtou polymetallic deposit (after [61]).
Figure 10. εNd(t) vs. (87Sr/86Sr)i diagram of the granite porphyry body in the Zhilingtou polymetallic deposit (after [61]).
Minerals 15 01166 g010
Table 1. Zircon Th-U-Pb isotopic analysis of granite porphyry in Zhilingtou Au-Mo-Pb-Zn polymetallic deposit.
Table 1. Zircon Th-U-Pb isotopic analysis of granite porphyry in Zhilingtou Au-Mo-Pb-Zn polymetallic deposit.
Spot No.ThUTh/UIsotopic RatiosAge (Ma)
ppmppm207Pb/206Pb1σ207Pb/235U1σ206Pb/238U1σ207Pb/206Pb1σ207Pb/235U1σ206Pb/238U1σ
ZK12-157.10 40.90 1.40 0.04962 0.00197 0.14668 0.00587 0.02165 0.00029 176.01 124.98 138.97 5.20 135.91 1.81
ZK12-299.57 78.09 1.28 0.05181 0.00414 0.15093 0.01228 0.02189 0.00054 275.99 183.31 142.74 10.84 136.37 3.38
ZK12-3205.23 156.46 1.31 0.05299 0.00275 0.15554 0.00791 0.02142 0.00027 327.84 118.51 146.79 6.95 136.40 1.70
ZK12-4205.79 201.27 1.02 0.05396 0.00210 0.15712 0.00650 0.02131 0.00042 368.57 87.03 148.18 5.70 136.63 2.66
ZK12-5313.57 205.14 1.53 0.05157 0.00226 0.15425 0.00657 0.02184 0.00036 264.88 101.84 145.66 5.78 136.71 2.27
ZK12-6316.39 228.57 1.38 0.05192 0.00283 0.15400 0.00834 0.02166 0.00027 283.40 156.46 145.44 7.34 136.75 1.68
ZK12-7319.78 235.68 1.36 0.05195 0.00234 0.15286 0.00678 0.02151 0.00029 283.40 103.69 144.44 5.97 137.21 1.83
ZK12-8447.61 291.74 1.53 0.05403 0.00296 0.15767 0.00935 0.02138 0.00048 372.28 128.69 148.66 8.20 137.34 3.02
ZK12-9461.55 309.41 1.49 0.05320 0.00250 0.15660 0.00724 0.02144 0.00024 344.50 105.55 147.72 6.36 138.10 1.52
ZK12-10465.78 365.30 1.28 0.05116 0.00215 0.15226 0.00647 0.02166 0.00026 255.62 96.28 143.90 5.70 138.16 1.64
ZK12-11620.80 383.53 1.62 0.04926 0.00225 0.14699 0.00633 0.02167 0.00031 166.75 104.62 139.25 5.60 138.16 1.95
ZK12-12621.00 458.72 1.35 0.05373 0.00366 0.15785 0.01012 0.02143 0.00057 361.17 153.68 148.82 8.88 138.22 3.62
ZK12-13639.42 461.60 1.39 0.05159 0.00316 0.15192 0.00876 0.02199 0.00038 333.39 173.13 143.60 7.72 138.80 2.40
ZK12-14646.46 482.61 1.34 0.05278 0.00424 0.15843 0.01321 0.02181 0.00051 320.43 187.94 149.33 11.58 139.10 3.23
ZK12-15734.39 492.72 1.49 0.05101 0.00293 0.15310 0.00883 0.02191 0.00041 242.66 133.32 144.65 7.77 139.27 2.59
ZK12-16751.06 543.46 1.38 0.05077 0.00207 0.15105 0.00607 0.02177 0.00024 231.55 60.18 142.84 5.35 139.62 1.52
ZK12-17757.79 610.71 1.24 0.05376 0.004690.15842 0.01290 0.02153 0.00039 361.17 198.12 149.32 11.31 139.70 2.48
ZK12-18870.54 660.10 1.32 0.054130.002640.15879 0.00754 0.02139 0.00029 375.98 111.10 149.65 6.61 140.23 1.84
Table 2. Whole-rock major element (%) and trace element (ppm) analysis results of the granite porphyry from the Zhilingtou Au-Mo-Pb-Zn polymetallic deposit.
Table 2. Whole-rock major element (%) and trace element (ppm) analysis results of the granite porphyry from the Zhilingtou Au-Mo-Pb-Zn polymetallic deposit.
Sample No. ZK12-01ZK12-02ZK12-03ZK12-04ZK12-05ZK12-06ZK12-07ZK12-08ZK12-09
SiO267.9168.2968.468.7268.7668.8069.2269.3269.59
TiO20.360.370.370.370.380.380.380.380.39
Al2O313.7814.2314.9615.3114.1814.2914.2814.6714.60
Fe2O3 T3.15 2.47 3.10 2.89 2.55 2.79 3.38 3.23 3.60
MnO0.070.060.070.060.060.060.060.050.06
MgO0.670.720.720.720.730.740.770.770.78
CaO1.151.161.191.221.341.381.451.471.60
Na2O3.042.883.223.153.443.193.542.253.24
K2O5.385.694.354.504.704.953.755.844.84
P2O50.110.110.120.120.120.120.120.120.12
LOI1.560.761.551.030.671.002.272.401.53
Total99.18 99.01 99.23 98.96 99.47 98.96 99.42 99.01 99.26
A/CNK0.98 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.04 1.07 1.07 1.09 1.10
A/NK1.26 1.27 1.29 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.32 1.35 1.35
Mg #0.30 0.37 0.35 0.35 0.36 0.37 0.37 0.36 0.30
Na2O + K2O8.428.577.577.658.148.147.298.098.08
Sc5.285.975.745.845.235.385.386.036.16
Ti220823152378246223612532253426452404
V31.932.333.834.232.334.331.634.532.2
Cr1.261.171.2721.291.821.421.351.02
Co3.442.253.13.472.673.174.614.274.64
Ni2.202.402.482.552.562.602.612.742.81
Cu27.710.511.910.55.4710.145.78.1224.0
Zn33.626.034.238.533.642.734.729.325.7
Ga17.318.018.718.917.317.418.517.017.9
Rb203181168172166194146199162
Sr208266267291296299307309320
Y18.92020.820.821.221.221.622.822.9
Zr468471456482314317270266521
Nb14.414.815.315.315.415.615.616.515.4
Ba103510941116115011581274818883904
La5359.661.86861.569.96461.00 53.6
Ce88.9111116125114128121115.00 97
Pr10.712.112.413.212.413.813.212.60 10.9
Nd40.839.639.940.939.64442.540.70 37.1
Sm5.896.526.356.486.497.026.966.65 5.93
Eu0.880.911.081.171.081.261.311.12 0.97
Gd4.614.975.095.275.215.645.375.40 4.61
Tb0.610.660.670.710.680.750.730.73 0.63
Dy3.433.433.483.623.613.843.83.79 3.31
Ho0.630.610.650.660.660.710.70.69 0.61
Er1.781.761.81.91.891.951.881.96 1.68
Tm0.270.260.260.270.270.280.260.29 0.25
Yb1.811.721.791.811.791.841.731.91 1.69
Lu0.280.270.260.280.280.280.260.30 0.26
Hf13.213.412.713.68.959.137.717.7814.7
Ta1.101.201.181.211.211.11.211.221.20
Pb13.412.018.723.916.551.813.924.513.7
Th25.025.425.725.726.326.626.826.826.9
U3.783.634.094.133.863.443.554.333.96
K44661 47234 36111 37356 39016 41091 31130 48480 40178
P480.11 523.75 523.75 567.40 523.75 523.75 567.40 567.40 523.75
REE213.59 243.41 251.53 269.27 247.67 279.27 142.70 252.14 218.54
LREE200.17 229.73 237.53 254.75 235.07 263.98 127.97 237.07 205.50
HREE13.42 13.68 14.00 14.52 12.60 15.29 14.73 15.07 13.04
LREE/HREE14.92 16.79 16.97 17.54 18.66 17.26 8.69 15.73 15.76
δEu0.500.470.560.590.550.590.630.550.55
(La/Yb)N21.0024.8624.7626.9524.6427.2526.5422.9122.75
Eu/Eu *0.52 0.49 0.58 0.61 0.57 0.61 0.66 0.57 0.57
Al73,034 75,419 79,288 81,143 75,154 75,737 75,684 77,751 77,380
10,000 × Ga/Al2.37 2.39 2.36 2.33 2.30 2.30 2.44 2.19 2.31
Rb/Sr0.98 0.68 0.55 0.33 0.47 0.66 0.47 0.68 0.46
Zr/Hf35.45 35.15 35.91 35.44 35.08 34.72 35.02 34.19 35.44
Nb/Ta13.09 12.33 12.97 12.64 12.73 14.18 12.89 13.52 12.83
Sr/Y11.01 13.30 12.84 13.99 13.96 14.10 14.21 13.55 13.97
Note: Mg # = Mg/(Mg + Fe2+); A/NK = Al2O3/(Na2O + K2O); A/CNK = Al2O3/(CaO + Na2O + K2O); Eu/Eu * = Eu/SQRT(SmN × GdN).
Table 3. Whole-rock Sr-Nd isotopic analysis results of the granite porphyry from the Zhilingtou Au-Mo-Pb-Zn.
Table 3. Whole-rock Sr-Nd isotopic analysis results of the granite porphyry from the Zhilingtou Au-Mo-Pb-Zn.
Sample No.Rb
(ppm)		Sr
(ppm)		87Rb/
86Sr		87Sr/
86Sr		1σ(87Sr/
86Sr)i		Sm
(ppm)		Nd
(ppm)		147Sm/
144Nd		143Nd/
144Nd		1σ(143Nd/
144Nd)i		εNd (0)εNd (t)TDM
(Ma)		TDM2
(Ma)
WJ-31683071.5834630.7151210.0000130.7123646.3539.90.0961580.511950.0000180.511874 −13.43 −11.89 1556 1877
WJ-41725170.9626640.7146520.0000090.712420 6.4840.90.0957270.5119430.0000150.511868 −13.56 −12.02 1559 1879
WJ-51663561.3492580.7148390.0000050.7124666.4939.60.0990220.5119280.0000160.511850 −13.85 −12.36 1623 1882
WJ-61942961.8964750.7167590.0000080.712538 7.02440.0963980.5119330.0000170.511858−13.74−12.21 15801893
WJ-71463091.3671980.7150610.0000050.7125686.9642.50.0989470.5119390.0000140.511861−13.64−12.15 16081896
WJ-91623501.3393190.714750.0000040.712635.9337.10.0965750.5119410.0000150.511865−13.59−12.06 15731900
WJ-111853341.6027370.7150980.0000040.712676.0937.30.0986490.5119360.0000170.511858−13.70−12.20 16081903
WJ-121823201.647510.7154390.0000050.7127116.2738.20.0991720.5119350.0000140.511857−13.71−12.22 16161908
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

Xing, B.; Chu, K.; Zheng, W.; Chen, X.; Qi, G.; Chen, S.; Gao, X. Geochronology and Geochemistry of the Granite Porphyry in the Zhilingtou Au-Mo-Pb-Zn Polymetallic Deposit, SE China: Implication for Mineralization Mechanism. Minerals 2025, 15, 1166. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15111166

AMA Style

Xing B, Chu K, Zheng W, Chen X, Qi G, Chen S, Gao X. Geochronology and Geochemistry of the Granite Porphyry in the Zhilingtou Au-Mo-Pb-Zn Polymetallic Deposit, SE China: Implication for Mineralization Mechanism. Minerals. 2025; 15(11):1166. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15111166

Chicago/Turabian Style

Xing, Bo, Kelei Chu, Wei Zheng, Xiaorong Chen, Gang Qi, Shengli Chen, and Xiang Gao. 2025. "Geochronology and Geochemistry of the Granite Porphyry in the Zhilingtou Au-Mo-Pb-Zn Polymetallic Deposit, SE China: Implication for Mineralization Mechanism" Minerals 15, no. 11: 1166. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15111166

APA Style

Xing, B., Chu, K., Zheng, W., Chen, X., Qi, G., Chen, S., & Gao, X. (2025). Geochronology and Geochemistry of the Granite Porphyry in the Zhilingtou Au-Mo-Pb-Zn Polymetallic Deposit, SE China: Implication for Mineralization Mechanism. Minerals, 15(11), 1166. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15111166

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