Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Surveys in Geophysics”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 289 records · Page 16Linked to original sources
USGS1983

Ground-followup studies of the 1977 airborne electromagnetic survey in the Assifar and Mulhal areas, Wadi Bidah district, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Parts of four airborne electromagnetic (AEM) anomalies were selected for study in order to determine the cause of high conductivity of Precambrian rocks underlying extensive areas in the southern Wadi Bidah district, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. In the Assifar area, which contains an ancient mine or prospect having the same name, geophysical data suggest that a mineralized body may lie beneath and immediately south of the ancient workings. Many other conductive zones detected during the course of the geophysical survey are thought to be related to metavolcanic rocks containing carbonaceous materials. Detailed geologic mapping, and possibly diamond core drilling, will be necessary to fully evaluate the area. In the Mulhal No. 2 area, located about 2 km south of the Mulhal ancient mine, geophysical studies suggest that mineralized rocks extend about 500 m along strike beneath outcrops of gossanous material. A brief review of the AEM ground-followup studies in the Wadi Bidah district suggests that most, if not all, of the AEM conductors are carbonaceous rocks. Secondary causes of conductivity are intense faulting and shearing.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2009

Geologic Map of the Yukon-Koyukuk Basin, Alaska

This map and accompanying digital files represent part of a systematic effort to release geologic data for the United States in a uniform manner. All the geologic data in this series will be published as parts of the U.S. Geological Survey Data Series. The geologic data in this series have been compiled from a wide variety of sources, ranging from state and regional geologic maps to large-scale field mapping. The data are presented for use at a nominal scale of 1:500,000, although individual datasets may contain data suitable for use at larger scales. The metadata associated with each release will provide more detailed information on sources and appropriate scales for use. Associated attribute databases accompany the spatial database of the geology and are uniformly structured for ease in developing regional- and national-scale maps. The 1:500,000-scale geologic map of the Yukon-Koyukuk Basin, Alaska, covers more than 200,000 square kilometers of western Alaska or nearly 15 percent of the total land area of the state. It stretches from the Brooks Range on the north to the Kuskokwim River and lower reaches of the Yukon River on the south and from Kotzebue Sound, Seward Peninsula, and Norton Sound on the west to the Yukon-Tanana Uplands and Tanana-Kuskokwim Lowlands on the east. It includes not only the northern and central part of the basin, but also the lands that border the basin. The area is characterized by isolated clusters of hills and low mountain ranges separated by broad alluviated interior and coastal lowlands. Most of the lowlands, except those bordering Kotzebue Sound and Norton Sound, support a heavy vegetation cover. Exposures of bedrock are generally limited to rubble-strewn ridgetops and to cutbanks along the rivers. The map of the Yukon-Koyukuk Basin was prepared largely from geologic field data collected between 1953 and 1988 by the U.S. Geological Survey and published as 1:250,000-scale geologic quadrangle maps. Additional data for parts of the Wiseman, Ruby, Medfra, and Ophir quadrangles came from 1:63,360-scale quadrangle maps published by the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys. The map also incorporates some unpublished field data for the Ruby quadrangle collected by R.M. Chapman between 1944 and 1977 and for parts of the Tanana, Bettles, Norton Bay, and Candle quadrangles collected by W.W. Patton, Jr. and others between 1954 and 1985. Sources of geologic map data for each of the eighteen 1:250,000-scale quadrangles used in compiling this 1:500,000-scale map of the Yukon-Koyukuk Basin as well as sources of general geologic information pertaining to the entire map area are provided in the 'Sources of Information' section.

Scientific Investigations Map↗
USGS1985

Management of ground water and evolving hydrogeologic studies in New Jersey : a heavily urbanized and industrialized state in the northeastern United States

New Jersey is the most densely populated and one of the most industrialized states in the United States. An abundance of freshwater and proximity to major northeastern metropolitan centers has facilitated this development. Pumpage of freshwater from all aquifers in the State in 1980 was 730 million gallons per day (2.76 million cubic meters per day). Management and efficient development of the ground-water resources of the State are the responsibility of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. Laws have been enacted and updated by the State legislature to manage water allocation and to control the disposal of hazardous wastes. Present resource management is guided by the New Jersey Water-Supply Master Plan of 1981. Funding for management activities is partially derived from the sale of state-approved bonds. Effective planning and regional management require accurate and up-to-date hydrologic information and analyses. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the New Jersey Geological Survey, is conducting three intensive ground-water studies involving the collection and interpretation of hydrologic data to meet the urgent water-management needs of New Jersey. These studies are part of a long-term cooperative program and are funded through the Water-Supply Bond Act of 1981. They began in 1983 and are scheduled to be completed in 1988. The project areas are situated in the New Jersey part of the Atlantic Coastal Plain in and near Atlantic City, Camden, and South River. They range in size from 400 to 1,200 mil (1,040 to 3,120 km2). The studies are designed to define the geology, hydrology, and geochemistry of the local ground-water systems. The results of these studies will enable the State to address more effectively major problems in these areas such as declining water levels, overpumping, saltwater intrusion, and ground-water contamination resulting from the improper disposal of hazardous wastes. Specific objectives of these studies by the U.S. Geological Survey are to (1) develop an accurate and up-to-date hydrogeologic data base, (2) design and implement a data-collection program and establish a computerized information management system, (3) refine the conceptualization of the ground-water flow system, and (4) define the geochemistry of the aquifer system by conducting a water-quality appraisal. The objectives are accomplished by standard hydrogeologic methods. Information concerning hydrogeologic framework, ground-water levels, water use, hydraulic characteristics, and water quality in the study areas is compiled from all available sources. Additional data needed are collected through well inventories, surface geophysical surveys, water-quality samplings, water-level measurements, and a well-drilling program. Interpretation of the flow system is based on the use of standard analytical techniques and digital flow modeling. Calibrated flow models will provide ground-water managers with a mechanism to develop and test regional water-supply strategies. Definition of the geochemistry of the aquifer system is accomplished through a variety of methods which depend on the problems and available data in the particular study area. The approach includes statistical analysis of water-quality data, reaction-path modeling, and determination of the movement of chemical constituents using analytical and numerical modeling techniques. A combined staff of 25 to 30 professionals and technicians from the New Jersey District office of the U.S. Geological Survey is committed to the three studies. The staff has specialists in geohydrology, numerical modeling, geochemistry, geophysics, and computer science. The findings of these studies will be published in data reports, interpretive reports, instructional manuals and journal articles.

New Jersey↗
USGS2007

Elements in cottonwood trees as an indicator of ground water contaminated by landfill leachate

Ground water at the Norman Landfill Research Site is contaminated by a leachate plume emanating from a closed, unlined landfill formerly operated by the city of Norman, Oklahoma, Ground water contaminated by the leachate plume is known to be elevated in the concentration of many, organic and inorganic constituents. Specific conductance, alkalinity, chloride, dissolved organic carbon, boron, sodium, strontium, and deuterium in ground water are considered to be indicators of the leachate plume at this site. Leaf samples of broad-leafed cottonwood, Populus deltoides, were collected from 57 sites around the closed landfill. Cottonwood, a phreatophyte or “well plant,” functions as a & surrogate well and serves as a ground water quality sampler. The leaf samples were combusted to ash and analyzed by instrumental neutron activation for 35 elements and by prompt-gamma instrumental neutron activation, for boron. A monitoring well was located within a few meters of a sampled cottonwood tree at 15 of the 57 sites, and ground water samples were collected from these monitoring wells simultaneously with a leaf sample. The chemical analyses of the ground water and leaf samples from these 15 sites indicated that boron, bromine, sodium, and strontium concentrations in leaves were significantly correlated with leachate indicator constituents in ground water. A point-plot map of selected percentiles indicated high concentrations of boron, bromine, and sodium in leaf ash from sites downgradient of the most recent landfill and from older landfills nearby. Data from leaf analysis greatly extended the known areal extent of the leachate plume previously determined from a network of monitoring wells and geophysical surveys. This phytosgeochemical study provided a cost-effective method for assessing the extent of a leachate plume from an old landfill. Such a method may be useful as a preliminary sampling tool to guide the design of hydrogeochemical and geophysical studies.

Oklahoma↗
USGS2023

Summary of the history and research of the U.S. Geological Survey gas hydrate properties laboratory in Menlo Park, California, active from 1993 to 2022

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Clathrate Hydrate Properties Project, active from 1993 to 2022 in Menlo Park, California, stemmed from an earlier project on the properties of planetary ices supported by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA’s) Planetary Geology and Geophysics Program. We took a material science approach in both projects, emphasizing chemical purity of samples, having controlled grain size and grain texture, and having verified crystal structures and phase relations. A foundational contribution from our USGS Gas Hydrate Properties Laboratory (GHPL) was in demonstrating the ability to reproducibly create such pure clathrate hydrate samples for study. Clathrate sample synthesis was achieved by heating sieved and weighed pure granular water ice in the presence of cold clathrate-forming gas or liquid. During heating, the ice melts at the grain scale and reacts with the gas to form clathrate. The resulting material has the desired uniformity and purity, with known intergranular porosity; our subsequent measurements showed that these clathrates exhibited the established clathrate structures and phase relations. This novel synthesis method was successful in creating clathrates of pure methane, ethane, propane, carbon dioxide, and multi-component gases. By mixing sand or silt with granular ice, we were also able to make clathrate-sediment aggregates with controlled grain textures. This simple method, adopted by many others in the community, permitted us to measure the physical and chemical properties of well-characterized and well-crystallized clathrates and clathrate/sediment aggregates. At about the same time, we adapted conventional scanning electron microscopy to cryogenic conditions for analysis of grain-scale characteristics of clathrates made in the GHPL as well as those collected from nature by drill core. The uniformity and reproducibility of our samples also allowed us to investigate how clathrates respond to environmental changes in chemistry, temperature, and pressure: we measured chemical exchange rates with dissolved gas species—such as noble gases and chlorofluorocarbons—as well as rates of clathrate dissolution and decomposition. These advances include the first accurate mapping of the conditions that promote the remarkable process of “anomalous preservation” at room pressure, a metastability that offers potential application for low-cost and safe transportation of natural gas from gas fields far from pipelines. Another advancement stemming from the GHPL was the compaction of as-synthesized porous clathrates to nearly full density by applying external pressure using three different techniques. Compaction allows for high-accuracy measurements of many fundamental physical and chemical properties of these materials, such as elastic wavespeeds and moduli, complete thermal properties, decomposition rates, thermal expansion, and clathrate equations of state. These properties and others, in turn, have helped USGS scientists to interpret geophysical well logs and active geophysical surveys, as well as model the rates of gas production from hydrate deposits in nature. Studying this class of icy minerals that occur in abundance on Earth and in the outer solar system has been a fascinating laboratory journey. Here, we summarize the history and major findings of the USGS GHPL in Menlo Park, including both in-house research as well as findings from the synergistic collaborations with other agencies and institutes that were key to the success of our laboratory. The Menlo Park GHPL was more formally incorporated within the USGS Gas Hydrates Project, a collaboration among multiple USGS Science Centers, in the early 2000s under the leadership of Deborah Hutchinson, and now under the leadership of Carolyn Ruppel and Timothy Collett.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1993

Application of borehole geophysics in defining the wellhead protection area for a fractured crystalline bedrock aquifer

Wellbore geophysical techniques were used to characterize fractures and flow in a bedrock aquifer at a site near Blackwater Brook in Dover, New Hampshire. The primary focus ofthis study was the development of a model to assist in evaluating the area surrounding a planned water supply well where contaminants introduced at the land surface might be induced to flow towards a pumping well. Well logs and geophysical surveys used in this study included lithologic logs based on examination of cuttings obtained during drilling; conventional caliper and natural gamma logs; video camera and acoustic televiewer surveys; highresolution vertical flow measurements under ambient conditions and during pumping; and borehole fluid conductivity logs obtained after the borehole fluid was replaced with deionized water. These surveys were used for several applications: 1) to define a conceptual model of aquifer structure to be used in groundwater exploration; 2) to estimate optimum locations for test and observation wells; and 3) to delineate a wellhead protection area (WHPA) for a planned water supply well. Integration of borehole data with surface geophysical and geological mapping data indicated that the study site lies along a northeast-trending intensely fractured contact zone between surface exposures of quartz monzonite and metasedimentary rocks. Four of five bedrock boreholes at the site were estimated to produce more than 150 gallons per minute (gpm) (568 L/min) of water during drilling. Aquifer testing and other investigations indicated that water flowed to the test well along fractures parallel to the northeast-trending contact zone and along other northeast and north-northwest-trending fractures. Statistical plots of fracture strikes showed frequency maxima in the same northeast and north-northwest directions, although additional maxima occurred in other directions. Flowmeter surveys and borehole fluid conductivity logging after fluid replacement were used to identify water-producing zones in the boreholes; fractures associated with inflow into boreholes showed a dominant northeast orientation. Borehole fluid conductivity logging after fluid replacement also gave profiles of such water-quality parameters as fluid electrical conductivity (FEC), pH, temperature, and oxidation-reduction potential, strengthening the interpretation of crossconnection of boreholes by certain fracture zones. The results of this study showed that the application of these borehole geophysical techniques at the Blackwater Brook site led to an improved understanding of such parameters as fracture location, attitude, flow direction and velocity, and water quality; all of which are important in the determination of a WHPA.

Log Analyst↗
USGS2009

Vibracore, radiocarbon, microfossil, and grain-size data from Apalachicola Bay, Florida

In 2007, the U.S. Geological Survey collected 24 vibracores within Apalachicola Bay, Florida. The vibracores were collected by using a Rossfelder electric percussive (P-3) vibracore system during a cruise on the Research Vessel (R/V) G.K. Gilbert. Selection of the core sites was based on a geophysical survey that was conducted during 2005 and 2006 in collaboration with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Coastal Services Center (CSC) and the Apalachicola Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. This report contains the vibracore data logs, photographs, and core-derived data including grain-size analyses, radiocarbon ages, microfossil counts, and sedimentological interpretations. The long-term goal of this study is to provide maps, data, and assistance to the Apalachicola Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve in their effort to monitor and understand the geology and ecology of Apalachicola Bay Estuary. These data will inform coastal managers charged with the responsibility for resource preservation.

Florida↗
USGS2016

Hyperspectral surveying for mineral resources in Alaska

Alaska is a major producer of base and precious metals and has a high potential for additional undiscovered mineral resources. However, discovery is hindered by Alaska’s vast size, remoteness, and rugged terrain. New methods are needed to overcome these obstacles in order to fully evaluate Alaska’s geology and mineral resource potential. Hyperspectral surveying is one method that can be used to rapidly acquire data about the distributions of surficial materials, including different types of bedrock and ground cover. In 2014, the U.S. Geological Survey began the Alaska Hyperspectral Project to assess the applicability of this method in Alaska. The primary study area is a remote part of the eastern Alaska Range where porphyry deposits are exposed. In collaboration with the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, the University of Alaska Fairbanks, and the National Park Service, the U.S. Geological Survey is collecting and analyzing hyperspectral data with the goals of enhancing geologic mapping and developing methods to identify and characterize mineral deposits elsewhere in Alaska.

Alaska↗
USGS2003

Archive of digital boomer seismic reflection data collected during USGS cruises 94GFP01, 95GFP01, 96GFP01, 97GFP01, and 98GFP02 in Lakes Pontchartrain, Borgne, and Maurepas, Louisiana, 1994-1998

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the University of New Orleans, the Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Coalition to Restore Coastal Louisiana, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the University of Georgia, conducted five geophysical surveys of Lakes Pontchartrain, Borgne, and Maurepas in Louisiana from 1994 to 1998. This report serves as an archive of unprocessed digital boomer seismic reflection data, trackline maps, navigation files, observers' logbooks, GIS information, and formal FGDC metadata. In addition, a filtered and gained digital GIF image of each seismic profile is provided. Refer to the Acronyms page for expansion of acronyms and abbreviations used in this report. The archived trace data are in standard Society of Exploration Geophysicists (SEG) SEG-Y format (Barry and others, 1975) and may be downloaded and processed with commercial or public domain software such as Seismic Unix (SU). Examples of SU processing scripts and in-house (USGS) software for viewing SEG-Y headers (Zihlman, 1992) are also provided. Processed profile images, trackline maps, navigation files, and formal metadata may be viewed with a web browser, and scanned handwritten logbooks may be viewed with Adobe Reader. To access the information contained on these discs, open the file 'index.htm' located at the top level of the discs using a web browser. This report also contains hyperlinks to USGS collaborators and other agencies. These links are only accessible if access to the Internet is available while viewing these documents.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1982

Geology of areas marked by geophysical anomalies (B-35 and B-34), Wadi Bidah District, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Geophysical surveys in the Wadi Bidah district, in the southwestern part of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, have revealed anomalies of the type that may be caused by deposits of massive sulfides. Accordingly, a study was undertaken to investigate the geologic environment associated with the geophysical anomalies and to determine whether mineral exploration of the anomalous areas might be warranted. An extensive geochemical sampling program did not disclose any evidence of ore mineral concentrations in the rocks. Detailed geologic mapping shows the anomalous areas to be underlain by Precambrian carbonaceous graywacke, the outcrop patterns of which closely fit the anomaly patterns. Field evidence and petrologic studies indicate that carbonaceous material in the rocks is the cause of the geophysical anomalies. Nothing was found in the anomalous areas that suggests the presence of mineral deposits of commercial grade, and further mineral investigations or exploration in the areas is not recommended.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1967

Serial publications commonly cited in technical bibliographies of the United States Geological Survey

This compilation is a listing of the serial publications cited in the following publications of the United States Geological Survey: Geophysical Abstracts, Abstracts of North American Geology, Bibliography of North American Geology, and Bibliography of Hydrology of the United States. A supplement of publications added since the main list was compiled begins on page 83. New journals cited in Geophysical . Abstracts are listed in each monthly issue. Serial publications cited in each annual bibliography are listed in that volume.

Report↗
USGS2010

Metallogenesis and Tectonics of Northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2010

Introduction, Chapter 1 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2010

Methodology of a combined regional metallogenic and tectonic analysis for northeast Asia, Chapter 2 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2010

Mineral-deposit models for northeast Asia, Chapter 3 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2010

Archean through Mesoproterozoic metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia, Chapter 4 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2010

Neoproterozoic through Silurian metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia, Chapter 5 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2010

Devonian through early Carboniferous (Mississippian) metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia, Chapter 6 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗