Alteration mapping in granitic gneiss using handheld geophysical and geochemical instruments: Implications for iron oxide-apatite and rare earth elements exploration

Kaitlyn A. Suarez; Michael L. Williams; Gregory J. Walsh; Daniel E. Harlov; Michael J. Jercinovic; Daniel J. Tjapkes; Ian W. Hillenbrand

doi:10.1016/j.oreoa.2025.100116

USGS · 70271451

Alteration mapping in granitic gneiss using handheld geophysical and geochemical instruments: Implications for iron oxide-apatite and rare earth elements exploration

Kaitlyn A. Suarez·Michael L. Williams·Gregory J. Walsh·Daniel E. Harlov·Michael J. Jercinovic·Daniel J. Tjapkes·Ian W. Hillenbrand

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The Adirondack Mountains of New York, U.S.A. contain iron oxide-apatite (IOA) mineral deposits with variable concentrations of rare earth elements (REE). The IOA mineral deposits are typically hosted in the Lyon Mountain Granite Gneiss and are spatially correlated with extensive Na metasomatism (albitization) of the surrounding country rocks, although some mineral deposits also occur in metagabbro, paragneiss, and anorthosite hosts. The location of albitization zones is key to finding new IOA mineral deposits and better understanding the mineralization processes associated with their genesis. However, the Na alteration zones are generally not visibly identifiable in outcrop or hand specimens because the color and textural changes are subtle and are thus difficult to map. Here, we discuss the results from testing two spectroscopic techniques (handheld, field gamma-ray spectroscopy, and portable X-ray fluorescence (pXRF)) to characterize albitization zones surrounding IOA mineral deposits. The gamma-ray and pXRF spectrometers successfully distinguished the relative intensity of alteration in the Lyon Mountain Granite Gneiss based on the K abundance. The measured K content decreases towards the IOA mineral deposits, and the magnitude and width of the gradient are similar along the strike of each mineral deposit. Elevated Th and U values are present in host rocks adjacent to REE-bearing IOA mineral deposits. The pXRF and gamma-ray spectrometer K values are remarkably consistent with laboratory-based, whole-rock XRF compositional data and, therefore, useful for semi-quantitative analysis. Notably, albitization aureoles are consistent around REE-rich and REE-poor mineral deposits, suggesting that saline fluids are essential for the petrogenesis of IOA mineral deposits but may not be critical to REE mineralization. Ultimately, this study demonstrates the utility of handheld gamma-ray and pXRF spectrometry for identifying otherwise cryptic albitization gradients associated with IOA mineral deposits in granitic gneiss.

Explore related subjects

Ore and Energy Resource Geology Article

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Kaitlyn A. Suarez, Michael L. Williams, Gregory J. Walsh, Daniel E. Harlov, Michael J. Jercinovic, Daniel J. Tjapkes, Ian W. Hillenbrand. 2025. Alteration mapping in granitic gneiss using handheld geophysical and geochemical instruments: Implications for iron oxide-apatite and rare earth elements exploration. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oreoa.2025.100116

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Adirondack Mountains place Article subject New York place Ore and Energy Resource Geology subject United STates place

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Geothermal district energy systems coupled with seasonal underground thermal energy storage: A U.S. techno-economic screening by climate and geology

In the United States, cooling-dominated commercial building loads can cause geothermal heat pump-based district energy systems to accumulate a long-term subsurface thermal imbalance, motivating the incorporation of seasonal underground thermal energy storage. We developed a transferable workflow to evaluate geothermal district systems that pair ground heat exchangers with seasonal underground thermal energy storage. Using standardized hourly loads for seven commercial buildings and a uniform cost framework, we simulated ten U.S. cities with a physics-based ground heat exchanger model, subsurface storage simulations, and economic assessment to isolate the roles of climate and hydrogeology. In cooling-dominated cities, underground thermal energy storage supplied the majority of annual cooling, cutting electricity use and summer peaks substantially while achieving levelized costs comparable to or below conventional chiller-boiler plants. In cooler climates, the storage share shrunk, required borefield size and costs rose, and levelized cost of energy increased nearly linearly with declining underground thermal energy storage fraction, indicating storage fraction as the primary economic lever. Sensitivity analysis showed capital risk dominated by borefield drilling and surface heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning and piping, with underground thermal energy storage costs secondary. This workflow provides a transparent foundation for site-specific design and screening of next-generation geothermal district energy systems.

Arizona, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi↗

USGS2025

Critical minerals in mine waste

Introduction Critical minerals are commodities with vulnerable supply chains that play a vital role in supporting the United States’ economy, national defense and security, emerging technologies, and energy independence. The prosperity of our Nation depends on generating a resilient supply of domestic critical minerals; mine waste may be an untapped source of these commodities. Mine waste from centuries of legacy mining persist on the landscape and may contain critical minerals and other valuable commodities previously deemed uneconomic to recover. At modern mines, the financial viability of recovering byproduct critical minerals, which are not the primary target, may be marginal and can ultimately destine them to mine waste. Further, mine waste can be a liability for the mining company or, at legacy mines, the taxpayer because of its effect on the landscape. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has several initiatives to evaluate critical mineral resources in various types of waste. This factsheet highlights studies of mine waste carried out by USGS scientists at the Geology, Energy & Minerals Science Center in collaboration with other science centers funded through the USGS Mineral Resources Program. Recovery of critical minerals from mine waste can aid in remediation efforts and increase domestic supply of vital mineral resources.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2026

The Great Lakes Geologic Mapping Coalition—Working collaboratively to understand the geology of the Great Lakes Region

Introduction The Great Lakes Geologic Mapping Coalition (GLGMC), commonly referred to as the “Coalition,” is a partnership between the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the U.S. States of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin and the Canadian province of Ontario. The member States receive funding for geologic mapping work from the USGS National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program (NCGMP), whereas Ontario participates as a nonfunded partner. The mission of the GLGMC is to produce three-dimensional (3D) geologic maps that depict unconsolidated sediments and near-surface bedrock in the Great Lakes region of North America. Geologic maps are the basis of most earth science investigations and help support resource exploration (energy, minerals, groundwater), natural hazard mitigation, infrastructure development, and land-use planning, all of which can be used to advance economic development and strengthen national security in the Great Lakes region. During the last few million years, the Great Lakes region has experienced repeated glacial advances and retreats, leaving behind extensive sediments, abundant natural resources, and widespread effects on the underlying bedrock geology (Swezey and others, 2022). Linked by shared histories of past glaciations, industrial agriculture, and legacy automotive, coal, steel, and manufacturing industries, the GLGMC member States collaborate to improve the understanding of the 3D distribution of the sediments overlying the region’s bedrock (fig. 1). Developing a comprehensive subsurface 3D framework of this glaciated terrain can provide earth science data to policymakers at all levels. These insights facilitate informed decisions on the exploration, use, and protection of vital resources, such as critical minerals, industrial materials, and aquifers, thereby supporting economic prosperity and the well-being of the citizens of this region. Since its inception in 1998, the Coalition has completed more than 100 geologic mapping projects across the Great Lakes region. Each project aims to deliver geologic maps, 3D datasets, and other information that improves understanding of the geology of the Great Lakes region, with an emphasis on economic and water resources. Key deliverables include 3D geologic maps and models typically portraying sediment thickness, often derived from top-of-bedrock and borehole data. These products are developed through a combination of fieldwork, subsurface modeling, and the collection and analysis of rock and sediment cores. To support Coalition goals, member States collaborate with scientists working on related STATEMAP, EDMAP, and FEDMAP projects. Coalition scientists also engage with Tribal Nations in the Great Lakes region to ensure that Tribal interests pertaining to Coalition work are addressed. Through this collaboration, the Coalition unites the efforts of State, Federal, and Tribal Nation stakeholders to advance geologic data production and enhance understanding of the geologic resources of the Great Lakes region.

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, ↗