Cited by 46Geological and Geochemical AnalysisGeochemistry and Geochronology of Asian Mineral DepositsGeological Studies and Exploration

U-Pb zircon and Re-Os isotope geochronology of mineralized ultramafic intrusions and associated nickel ores from the Thompson nickel belt, Manitoba, Canada

Hulbert, L. J., Hamilton, M. A., Horan, M. F., Scoates, R. F. J.·2005·Economic Geology

Abstract

A U-Pb zircon age (1880 ± 5 Ma) has been obtained from a mineralized ultramafic body in the Setting Lake area of the Thompson nickel belt. This crucial new age for ultramafic magmatism in the Thompson belt, in conjunction with the precise age determinations established for the Molson dike swarm (Cross Lake dike, 1883.7+1.7 –1.5 +Ma; Cuthbert Lake dike, 1883 ± 2 Ma) and the Fox River sill (1882.9+1.5 –1.4 +Ma) by Heaman et al. (1986) provides the first direct evidence for the contemporaneous nature of mafic-ultramafic magmatism along the northwest margin of the Superior craton. This magmatic event also appears to be synchronous with mafic magmatism in other parts of the Circum-Superior belt and the Trans-Hudson orogen. Re-Os isotope systematics of mineralized samples from seven deposits that span the length of the belt produce an age similar to the U-Pb zircon age but with a much larger error (1885 ± 49 Ma with an initial γ Os of 4.6). The Os isotope data demonstrate that the source of the Thompson belt ores, including those orebodies hosted in ultramafic rocks and those hosted in pelitic rocks, was dominantly mantle derived. Establishing that Thompson belt magmatism is synchronous with the Molson dike swarm and the extensive Fox River sill has important new exploration implications and requires modification of existing concepts which have presumed that Thompson belt magmatism is significantly older than these other intrusive suites. Also, it would appear that other important Ni and Ni-Cu deposits elsewhere in the Circum-Superior belt and in the Trans-Hudson orogen formed at or near 1.88 Ga, and thus this age could be considered an important and widespread nickel mineralizing metallogenic interval during the Early Proterozoic.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2113/100.1.0029

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hulbert, L. J., Hamilton, M. A., Horan, M. F., & Scoates, R. F. J.
Affiliations
  • Geological Survey of Canada (CA)
  • Carnegie Institution for Science (US)
Venue
Economic Geology
Published
2005-01-01
Volume
100
Issue
1
Pages
29-41
ISSN
0361-0128 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2047881069
Cited by
46
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3
FWCI
1.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Economic Geology (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Geological Survey
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geophysics › Geological and Geochemical Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Geochemistry and Geochronology of Asian Mineral Deposits
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geology › Geological Studies and Exploration
Keywords
ultramafic intrusions, nickel ore, zircon U-Pb geochronology, Re-Os isotopes, Superior Province, Trans-Hudson Orogen, nickel-copper deposits

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review