Enigmatic Origin of

Carlin-Type Deposits:
An Amagmatic Solution?
Eric Seedorff and Mark D. Barton
Center for Mineral Resources
Department of Geosciences
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721-0077
 What we are up to
• Create an awareness of the non-
uniqueness problem
 Certain evidence may favor one model but
also could be accommodated by another
• Generate a spirit of multiple working
hypotheses
 Staying in inquiry improves the likelihood that
we will be receptive to new evidence
“The question is not what you
look at, but what you see.”

--Henry David Thoreau

 Location of Au in porphyry systems
District Ounces in Ounces in Ounces in
porphyry skarn and Carlin-like
replacement setting
Bingham 40.4 M 9.2 M 1.7 M
(Krahulec, 1997)

Robinson ~2.3 M ~1.0 M 1.2 M

(E. Seedorff, unpub. data)
Grasberg ~72 M ~15 M None?
(Rubin and Kyle, 1997)

•Carlin-like settings in porphyry systems contain a small

proportion of the Au in the system
•>100 M oz at Carlin, if porphyry-related, would likely imply
several times that amount in skarn and porphyry settings
 Dimensions and zoning

• A question of scale
 Size of footprints of Carlin-type systems are
substantially larger than giant igneous-related
porphyry and high-sulfidation epithermal deposits
 Sizes of intrusions and Carlin-type systems

Coleman et al., 2004, Fig. 1

• Tuolumne Intrusive Suite, Sierra Nevada Batholith
 Assembled by emplacement of plutons over 10 m.y.
• Carlin trend (figures at same scale)
 About the same size as a large composite pluton within a batholith
 Gold transport
• High H2S concentration
 Enhances solubility of Au
and associated trace
elements (As, Sb, Tl, and
Hg) as sulfide complexes
 Suppresses solubility of Fe,
base metals, and Ag as
chloride complexes
 Au transported as AuHS°
and/or Au(HS)-12
complexes

225°C, 500 bars, aCl- =1; a H2S(aq) = 10-2

Hofstra and Cline, 2000, Fig. 14A

 Geochemical constraints—
assertion
• Fluid conditions (e.g., Hofstra and Cline, 2000)
 150-250°C, moderately acidic (pH ~5), reduced fluids, <6 wt %
NaCl equiv., < 4 mol % CO2, <0.4 mol % CH4, and >0.01 mol %
H2S; little or no evidence of boiling
• Stable isotopes
 Meteoric water except Getchell trend (deep-
sourcedmetamorphic or magmatic)
• Pb isotopes (Tosdal et al., 2003)
 Two sources; the source that typifies the ore stage is isotopically
similar to Upper Proterozoic and Cambrian clastic rocks
 But not to potential (known?) magmatic sources
 Second source similar to Ordovician and Devonian siliciclastic
and calcareous rocks
 Sources of sulfur, heat, and water
• Magmas
• Sedimentary rocks
• Metasedimentary rocks
• Surface and basinal fluids
 Descriptive models
• Carlin-type: Reduced, Au-bearing environments are
common, often low T, hosted by sedimentary rocks;
distinct from
• Carlin-like: Distal gold deposits around porphyry systems
(we agree with existing models for these)
 Bingham
 Robinson
 Buffalo Valley
• Difficult to distinguish the two without extensive exposure
• Our criteria
 Huge systems
 Poor zoning
 Low T, fairly low salinity
• Now switch to geologic framework
Three possible scenarios
• Magmatic
origin
 Magmatic
fluids
• Amagmatic
origins
 Metamorphic
fluids
 Surface-
derived fluids
Magmatic fluids
• Primary source of materials
 Mineralizing pluton; should
correlate with magma
composition
• Primary source of heat
 Local magmas
• Moderate scale systems
 Even Barneys Canyon is
only 6 km from center of
Bingham
Metamorphic (orogenic)
• Primary source of
materials
 Various, depending on site
of metamorphism, but
including basal clastic
rocks of miogeocline
• Primary source of heat
 Mantle-derived,
underplated magmas,
crustal thickening
• Regional scale systems
Surface-derived
• Primary source of
materials
 Scavenged from upper
crust—primarily clastic
rocks of miogeocline
• Primary source of heat
 Thermal energy extracted
from upper crust by
extension-driven increases
in permeability
• Regional scale systems
 Predictions
Characteristic Surface- Metamorphic Magmatic
derived
Alteration Regional Regional A few km
scale scale across

Zoning Weak Weak Zoned around

intrusions and
higher T alt’n
Role of Non-essen- Non-essential Essential;
magmatism tial plutons
provide
metals and
fluid
 Regional
hydrothermal
systems

• Regional systems are not only

large, but they have weak alteration
zoning
 Orogenic gold systems, e.g., Mother
Lode of California
 Note spatial proximity to igneous rocks
(probably genetically unrelated)
 Note similarity in scale of Carlin trend to
central Mother Lode
Source rocks for Au in amagmatic models

Seedorff, 1991,
Fig. 20

• Fine-grained clastic
rocks at base of
miogeocline may be in
appropriate setting and
have appropriate
chemistry to be the
source of metals
Seedorff, 1991, Table 4
Fluid pathways on P-T diagram

• Pathways on diagram contoured for

solubilities of quartz and calcite
• Note similarity of products at low P and T
 Magmatic fluids
• Start at high
temperature
• Path
 Cooling,
decompression
• Temperatures of
quartz deposition
 Nonspecific
 Quartz veins
expected at depth
 Metamorphic fluids
• May never attain
high temperature
• Path
 Decompression
and cooling
• Temperatures of
quartz deposition
 Could be >400°C
 Surface-derived fluids
• Never attain high
temperature
• Path
 Heating, followed by
decompression and
cooling
• Temperatures of
quartz deposition
 Constrained by
temperature of brittle-
ductile transition:
<350°C
 Geochemical requirements
• If related to intrusions
 Intrusions should have a characteristic magmatic
composition
• If metamorphic
 Source rocks should generate sufficient fluid of
appropriate composition
• If surface-derived
 Surface waters should strongly influence the redox
state and the quantity and nature of ligands
 However, composition of rocks along the flow path
must contribute the metal suite
Many systems could have mixed fluid sources
 Other consequences—Magmatic
• A characteristic magmatic composition implies:
 Deposits are distal to monzonitic porphyry Cu-(Mo-Au) systems,
such as Bingham. (Sillitoe and Bonham, 1990) If so, oxidized
plutons, strong positive aeromagnetic signature
 Deposits are directly related to oxidized silicic rocks of same
suite, e.g., rhyolite at Beast (Ressel et al., 2000). If so, may be
difficult to transport Au
 Deposits are high-level expressions of intrusion-related gold
deposits, which are related to reduced silicic plutons. If so, silicic
rocks could transport sufficient Au, but aeromagnetic expression
would be subdued
• An intrusion-related system implies that there should be a
strong thermal gradient toward the magmatic source
 If so, where are the higher T alteration products? In carbonate
rocks, cogenetic skarn should appear toward the source intrusion
Regardless of the magma type, plutons must be big
 Other consequences—Metamorphic
• Metamorphic origin implies that shallower Carlin-type
system should rooted in higher temperature quartz veins
 Are quartz veins with Eocene ages and the appropriate
characteristics, such as those found in orogenic Au deposits
(Groves et al., 1998), observed? If so, are they beneath the
Carlin-type deposits?
• Age of deposits and a metamorphic origin imply that there
should be evidence of metamorphic fluids in the Eocene
 Are there Eocene metamorphic fluids? If so, is there a prograde
Eocene metamorphic event?
 Or, is there a way to store older metamorphic fluids and release
them in the Eocene? If so, why were they not released during
peak metamorphism in Late Cretaceous or early Tertiary?
Regardless of the source of metamorphic fluids, they must
be abundant
Other consequences—Surface-derived
• Surface-derivation of fluids and the temperatures of
deposition imply a plumbing system that links fluid
recharge area, hot rocks at depth, and the environment
of gold deposition
 Normal or transtensional fault systems formed during extreme
Eocene extension could provide much of the permeability. If so,
why are many deposits located in less extended domains?
• Because sources of fluid and metals are spatially
separated, this model requires appropriate concurrence
of fluid and rock compositions at the surface and along
the path
 Metals in synextensional ore deposits should change vary the
compositions of either the surficial fluids or source rocks change.
If so, surface fluids for Carlin-type deposits should be able to
transport Au and be abundant
One should recognize systematic changes with changes
with crustal column and contemporaneous surface
environment
Cautions because of superposition
of systems
• Occurs at regional to local scales
 Scale of Great Basin
 Scale of a county in Nevada
 Scale of a mining district
• Caution in interpreting evidence
 Given the likelihood that systems will be
superimposed on one another
 Especially for big systems such as Carlin-type
Au deposits
 Superposition at a regional scale
• Great Basin scale
 Contours of Mesozoic
intrusion fraction =
Proportion of outcrops of
Mesozoic and older rocks Carlin
that is comprised of
Mesozoic plutons
• Intrusion fraction
 Also can be treated as the
probability that a Tertiary
event (e.g., Carlin-type
system) would be
superimposed on a
Mesozoic pluton

Seedorff, 1991, Fig. 19, modified

after Barton et al., 1988, Fig. 5-3A
Sub-regional scale: White Pine County
• Variety of deposit types, including many igneous-related types
 Even in area of relatively sparse plutons, opportunity for superposition

M. D. Barton and E. Seedorff, unpub. data

Superposition at
a district scale
• Eureka district, Eureka
County, Nevada
 Ruby Hill porphyry Mo-Cu
system with Zn-Pb-Ag-Au
replacement deposits
~106 Ma
 McCullough Butte F-Be
~84 Ma
 Wood Cone Mo-Zn-Pb-Ag
mid-Tertiary
 Carlin-type Au system,
including Archimedes and
Windfall mid-Tertiary?
• Hybrid systems likely
 Superposition in time as
well as space, e.g.,
surface-derived fluids
mixed with magmatic fluids
 Lone Tree?

M. D. Barton and G. Ghidotti, unpub. data

 Criteria of a successful model
• Most models
 Predict selected aspects of the occurrences but don’t
account for full range of features
• A satisfactory model should explain these details
 Regional localization in northern Great Basin
 Regional alteration patterns with weak zoning
 Superclusters, long trends
 Geochemistry (lots of Au, big, reduced, low T, fairly
low salinity)
 Physics of the proposed process (energy balance,
permeability structure)
 Descriptive model (excluding igneous-centered
ones)—hard to know
 What might it mean?
Exploration consequences
• Magmatic
 Worry about source—find magma chamber
 Aeromagnetic signature could be important
 Interested in compositions of plutons
• Amagmatic
 Worry about source rocks and plumbing
system (faults, aquifers)
• Source model not important if have trap
 Deposit scale—doesn’t matter
Multiple working hypotheses, please
“For every complex
problem there is
an answer that is
clear, simple, and
wrong.”
--H. L. Mencken

“The question is not

what you look at,
but what you see.” Sillitoe and Bonham, 1990, Fig. 3
--Henry David Thoreau