Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “The Alaska Miner”

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 901 records · Page 50Linked to original sources
USGS2019

Negligible cycling of terrestrial carbon in many lakes of the arid circumpolar landscape

High-latitude environments store nearly half of the planet’s below-ground organic carbon (OC), mostly in perennially frozen permafrost soils. Climatic changes drive increased export of terrestrial OC into many aquatic networks, yet the role that circumpolar lakes play in mineralizing this carbon is unclear. Here we directly evaluate ecosystem-scale OC cycling for lakes of interior Alaska. This arid, low-relief lake landscape is representative of over a quarter of total northern circumpolar lake area, but is greatly under-represented in current studies. Contrary to projections based on work in other regions, the studied lakes had a negligible role in mineralizing terrestrial carbon; they received little OC from ancient permafrost soils, and had small net contribution to the watershed carbon balance. Instead, most lakes recycled large quantities of internally derived carbon fixed from atmospheric CO 2 , underscoring their importance as critical sites for material and energy provision to regional food webs. Our findings deviate from the prevailing paradigm that northern lakes are hotspots of terrestrial OC processing. The shallow and hydrologically disconnected nature of lakes in many arid circumpolar landscapes isolates them from terrestrial carbon processing under current climatic conditions.

Nature Geoscience↗
USGS2013

Tectonic evolution and Cretaceous gold metallogenesis of southwestern Alaska

Cretaceous gold metallogenesis in southwestern Alaska comprises three distinct episodes related to the accretionary evolution of northwestern North America. The oldest mineralizing event is characterized by 112 Ma Cu-Au-Bi-Te porphyry-type(?) veining in the zoned Bonanza and adjacent plutons that intruded rocks of the Nyac terrane. Tectonic reconstructions and limited geological and geochemical data suggest that Cu-Au mineralization in the Nyac district may be related to terminal subduction during accretion of the Togiak-Koyukuk arc. The subsequent 100 to 89 Ma metallogenic event is a product of subduction-related magmatism immediately following accretion of the Peninsular-Alexander-Wrangellia superterrane and includes formation of the giant Pebble porphyry Cu-Au-Mo deposit. Pebble underwent a complex history of highly oxidized magmatism that is isotopically linked to enriched lithosphere or metasomatized mantle sources. Pebble and other porphyryrelated plutons were emplaced as a consequence of changes in plate motion and onset of dextral transpression along the continental margin to the southeast of their present-day locations. The final 75 to 65 Ma metallogenic event is regionally the most extensive. It followed a ~15-m.y.-long magmatic lull and is related to enigmatic subduction-related magmatism in the western part of the Alaska Range and the Kuskokwim basin. This event resulted in the formation of porphyry, reduced pluton-related, orogenic, and possible epithermal Au deposits. In the better-studied relatively low-relief areas of the Kuskokwim basin, many of the mineralized systems are spatially associated with ilmenite-series monzonite to quartz monzonite composite plutons that have isotopic signatures consistent with derivation from crustally contaminated mantle sources. These pluton-hosted Au deposits comprise low-sulfide stockworks, sheeted veins, and/or breccias in the cupolas of moderately differentiated intrusions that contain high Au; anomalous As, Bi, Sb, and/or Te; and have variable, but not uneconomic, Cu concentrations. In addition, Au, Sb, and/or Hg deposits hosted by competent NE-trending granite porphyry dike-sill complexes or along faults in flysch are widespread in the Kuskokwim basin. These deposits, including the giant Donlin Creek Au deposit, formed at shallow crustal levels and are classified here as epizonal orogenic Au deposits and related Hg and Sb lodes. Mesozonal orogenic Au deposits were formed along the margins of the uplifting Willow Creek pluton that is now exposed along the southern side of the Talkeetna Mountains batholith. Recent discoveries in the rugged Alaska Range comprise less well-studied porphyry Au-Cu (Whistler, Island Mountain), epithermal(?) Au (Terra), and reduced pluton-hosted Au deposits (Estelle). The cause of the broad latest Cretaceous magmatism associated with the final metallogenic event is enigmatic, but indicates widespread high heat flow possibly related to flat-slab subduction, lithospheric mantle delamination, or escape tectonics. Plutonism postdated regional folding and coincided with periods of movement along regional faults and formation of the NE-trending structural fabric. Magmatism resulted from initiation of transpressional faulting in more landward positions during oblique subduction of the Kula plate. Crustal contamination of mantle melts, either near their source or during ascent through the thick flysch of the Kuskokwim basin, produced low oxidation state magmas and controlled much of the metallogeny, particularly for those deposits that display similarities to both reduced porphyry Au-Cu deposits and, to a lesser degree, reduced intrusion-related Au systems. High heat flow also induced crustal melting and metamorphic devolatilization to form orogenic Au deposits. A transition to extension at ~60 Ma recorded elsewhere in Alaska temporally corresponds to termination of gold deposit formation in southwestern Alaska. The multiple periods of gold metallogenesis in southwestern Alaska offer a wide variety of targets for exploration within discrete parts of the region.

Society of Economic Geologists Special Publication↗
USGS2019

U-Pb and Lu-Hf isotope, age, and trace-element data from zircons at four sites in the western Alaska Range and Talkeetna Mountains, Alaska

This Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys (DGGS) Raw Data File presents U-Pb geochronology and Lu-Hf isotopic compositions, age-dating results, and additional trace-elemental composition of zircons from four granitoids sampled during investigations by DGGS geologists in the western Alaska Range and the Talkeetna Mountains. The purpose of the Lu-Hf and U-Pb isotopic study was to better understand the Jurassic through early Tertiary magmatic and tectonic evolution of the Alaska Range and the significance of that magmatism for the formation of metallic mineral deposits. The U-Pb isotopic data also serve to further refine the crystallization age of plutons, which were previously ambiguous in 40Ar/39Ar geochronology studies.

Alaska↗
USGS2024

Insights into glendonite formation from the upper Oligocene Sagavanirktok Formation, North Slope, Alaska

The type locality for the upper Oligocene Nuwok Member of the Sagavanirktok Formation (Carter Creek, North Slope, Alaska, USA) contains abundant occurrence of glendonite, a pseudomorph after the calcium carbonate mineral ikaite, which typically forms in the shallow subsurface of cold marine sediments. The region during the time of Nuwok Member deposition was located at a high latitude, similar to today, and the study site is characterized by sands and silty muds interpreted here to have been deposited in coastal and shelfal marine environments. Isotopic (Sr) and biostratigraphic (foraminifera) evidence presented here refine the depositional age of the outcrop to approximately 24 Ma. Glendonites occur in two basic forms: radial clusters, commonly centered around a single larger primary crystal ( approx. 10 cm; Type A) and larger single blades generally without accessory crystals (approx. 15–25 cm; Type B). Microscopic examination revealed a sequence of multiple types of replacive calcite that formed as a direct result of ikaite transformation: Type 1 rhombohedral crystals characterized by microporous and inclusion-rich cores and concentric zones, Type 2A, composed of clear calcite that overgrew and augmented Type 1 crystals, and inclusion-rich, microcrystalline Type 2B, which formed a matrix surrounding the rhombs and commonly dominates the outer rims of glendonite specimens. Type 3 calcite precipitated as fibrous, botryoidal epitaxial cement atop previous phases and is not ikaite-derived. These phases are distributed in similar ways in all examined specimens and are consistent with several previously described glendonite occurrences around the world, despite differing diagenetic and geologic histories. Stable isotope evidence (δ13C and δ18O) suggests sourcing of glendonite carbon from both organic and methanogenic sources. Glendonites of the Nuwok Member can therefore assist in the determination of a more comprehensive ikaite transformation model, improving our understanding of glendonite formation and the sedimentological and environmental context of their occurrence. Oligocene glendonites are uncommon globally; the well-preserved occurrence described here can allow future studies to better reconstruct Arctic environmental conditions and paleoclimates during this time.

Alaska↗
USGS1993

Geologic studies in Alaska by the U.S. Geological Survey, 1992

This collection of 19 papers continues the annual series of U.S. Geological Survey reports on the geology of Alaska. The contributions, which include full-length Articles and shorter Geologic Notes, cover a broad range of topics including dune formation, stratigraphy, paleontology, isotopic dating, mineral resources, and tectonics. Articles, grouped under four regional headings, span nearly the entire State from the North Slope to southwestern, south-central, and southeastern Alaska (fig. 1). In the section on northern Alaska, Galloway and Carter use new data on dune morphology and radiocarbon ages from the western Arctic Coastal Plain to develop a late Holocene chronology of multiple episodes of dune stabilization and reactivation for the region. Their study has important implications for climatic changes in northern Alaska during the past 4,000 years. In two papers, Dumoulin and her coauthors describe lithofacies and conodont faunas of Carboniferous strata in the western Brooks Range, discuss depositional environments, and propose possible correlations and source areas for some of the strata. Schenk and Bird propose a preliminary division of the Lower Cretaceous stratigraphic section in the central part of the North Slope into depositional sequences. Aleinikoff and others present new U-Pb data for zircons from metaigneous rocks from the central Brooks Range. Karl and Mull, reacting to a proposal regarding terrane nomenclature for northern Alaska that was published in last year's Alaskan Studies Bulletin, provide a historical perspective of the evolution of terminology for tectonic units in the Brooks Range and present their own recommendations.

Alaska↗
USGS2010

Stream-sediment samples reanalyzed for major, rare earth, and trace elements from seven 1:250,000-scale quadrangles, south-central Alaska, 2007-09

During the 1960s through the 1980s, the U.S. Geological Survey conducted reconnaissance geochemical surveys of drainage basins throughout most of the Iliamna, Lake Clark, Lime Hills, and Talkeetna 1:250,000-scale quadrangles and parts of the McGrath, Seldovia, and Tyonek 1:250,000-scale quadrangles in Alaska. These geochemical surveys provide data necessary to assess the potential for undiscovered mineral resources and provide data that may be used to determine regional-scale element baselines. This report provides new data for 1,075 of the previously collected stream-sediment samples. The new analyses include a broader spectrum of elements and provide data that are more precise than the original analyses. All samples were analyzed for arsenic by hydride generation atomic absorption spectrometry, for gold, palladium, and platinum by inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry after lead button fire assay separation, and for a suite of 55 major, rare earth, and trace elements by inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry and inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry after sodium peroxide sinter at 450 degrees Celsius.

Data Series↗
USGS2010

Lead isotope database of unpublished results from sulfide mineral occurrences — California, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington

The Pb isotope database for sulfide deposits and occurrences in the Western United States was funded by the Mineral Resources Program, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Reports on Pb isotope data from Alaska were published in Church and others (1987a) and Gaccetta and Church (1989). The primary objectives of the project were three-fold: * To utilize Pb isotope signatures, in conjunction with the regional mapping, to assess the relative ages and to categorize the types of deposits studied, * To relate the Pb isotope and trace-element geochemical signatures of specific deposits and occurrences to ore-forming processes, and * To use the Pb isotope data to correlate lithotectonic terranes within the northern Cordillera. The report by Church and others (1987b) shows how this fingerprinting methodology can be applied to trace the offset of lithostratigraphic terranes

California, Idaho, Oregon, Washington↗
USGS1959

Iron-ore resources of the United States including Alaska and Puerto Rico, 1955

The importance of iron ore, the basic raw material of steel, as a fundamental mineral, resource is shown by the fact that about 100 million long tons of steel is used annually in the economy of the United States, as compared with a combined total of about 5 million long tons of copper, lead, zinc, and aluminum. Satisfying this annual demand for steel requires about 110 million tons of iron ore and 70 million tons of scrap iron and steel. The average annual consumption of iron ore in the United States from 1951 to 1955, inclusive, was about 110 million long tons, which is about twice the annual average from 1900 to 1930. Production of iron ore in the United States in this 5-year period averaged approximately 100 million long tons annually, divided by regions as follows (in percent): Lake Superior, 84.1; southeastern, 6.7; western, 6.7; northeastern, 1.4; and central and gulf, 1.1. Mining of iron ore began in the American Colonies about 1619, and for 225 years it was limited to eastern United States where fuel and markets were readily available. Production of iron ore from the Lake Superior region began in 1846; the region became the leading domestic source by 1890, and the Mesabi range in Minnesota has been the world's most productive area since 1896. Proximity of raw materials, water transportation, and markets has resulted in centralization of the country's iron and steel industry in the lower Great Lakes area. Increased imports of iron ore being delivered to eastern United States as well as demands for steel in nearby markets have given impetus to expansion in the steel-making capacity in this area. The four chief iron-ore minerals - hematite, liminite, magnetite, and siderite - are widely distributed but only locally form deposits of sufficient tonnage and grade to be commercially valuable at the present time. The iron content of these minerals, of which hematite is the most important, ranges from 48 percent in siderite to 72 percent in magnetite, but as these minerals are associated with other rock-forming minerals, the iron content of marketable ore has a lower range from 30 to 67 percent. Chemical constituents other than iron also are important in determining the marketability of iron ore. Although some iron ores can be used in the blast furnace as mined, others must first be improved either chemically by reduction of undesirable constituents, or physically by aggregation. Phosphorus and sulfur particularly are common deleterious elements; excessive silica is also undesirable but within certain limits can be controlled by additional flux. Lime and magnesia are beneficial in specified amounts because of their fluxing qualities, and a small amount of alumina improves the fluidity of slag. Manganese is especially desirable as a deoxidizing and desulfurizing agent. Titanium, chromium, and nickel must also be considered in the use of ore containing these elements. The principal iron-ore deposits in the United States have been formed by three processes. Hematite-bearing bedded deposits such as those at Birmingham, Ala., are marine sedimentary rocks which, except for weathering along the outcrop, have remained practically unaltered since deposition. Deposits of the Lake Superior region, also in sedimentary strata, originally had a slightly lower iron content than those at-Birmingham, but ore bodies of hematite and limonite were formed by removal of other constituents in solution after deposition of the beds, with a relative increase of iron content in the material remaining. Limestone adjacent to igneous intrusions has been replaced by magnetite deposits at Cornwall, Pa., and by hematite-magnetite deposits near Cedar City, Utah. Magnetite deposits in New Jersey and in the Adirondack Mountains of New York are generally believed to have been formed by replacement of grains of other minerals in metamorphic rocks. Iron-ore resources are made up of reserves of iron ore, material usable under existing economic and technologic conditions; and potential ore, material likely to become usable under more favorable conditions. The tonnage and grade of material of combined reserves and potential ore in each of the deposits known or believed to contain at least 200,000 long tons of iron-ore resources are tabulated in this report, and numerous sources of additional information are given in a selected bibliography. The total domestic iron-ore resources are estimated at approximately 75,000 million long tons of crude ore. About 10,000 million tons of the resources is reserves of crude ore that will probably yield 5,500 million tons of concentrates and direct-shipping ore. About 65,000 million tons is potential ore and may yield 25,000 million tons of concentrates and some direct-shipping ore.

Bulletin↗
USGS1977

Preliminary geologic map of Seward Peninsula, Alaska

This preliminary map is the first of several data compilations being prepared as a foundation for evaluating the mineral resource potential of Seward Peninsula. In addition to the sources of geologic data credited in the index map, Sainsbury's recent (1975) summary of his extensive geologic studies on Seward Peninsula has been particularly helpful. The map, unit descriptions, and correlations reflect as closely as possible the geology as published in the principal sources of geological data. Important sources of additional and more detailed descriptive data are referenced in the description of map units.

Alaska↗
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↗
USGS2010

Late Carboniferous through early Jurassic metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia, Chapter 7 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

Middle Jurassic through Quaternary metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia, Chapter 8 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↗