Corriveau, L., Perreault, S., and Davidson, A., 2007, Prospecitive metallogenic settings of the Grenville Province, in Goodfellow, W.D., ed., Mineral Deposits of Canada: A Synthesis of Major Deposit-Types, District Metallogeny, the Evolution of Geological Provinces, and Exploration Methods: Geological Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special Publication No. 5, p. 819-847. PROSPECTIVE METALLOGENIC SETTINGS OF THE GRENVILLE PROVINCE LOUISE CORRIVEAU 1 , SERGE PERREAULT 2 , AND ANTHONY DAVIDSON 3 1. Geological Survey of Canada, 490 de la Couronne, Quebec G1K 9A9 2. Ministère des Ressources naturelles et de la Faune du Québec, 545 boul. Crémazie est, bureau 1110, Montreal, Quebec H2M 2V1 3. Geological Survey of Canada (retired), 601 Booth St., Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0E8 Corresponding author’s email: [email protected]Abstract The Grenville Province exposes the deep crustal root of a Himalayan-type collisional orogen. However, most of its components predate collisional orogeny, and the main episodes of crustal build-up are Andean in type. Many of the ensuing volcano-plutonic arc belts are now parts of the gneiss complexes that typify large segments of the Grenville Province. Ages of inferred magmatic arcs, intra-arc rifts, aborted back-arcs and island-arcs components range from Archean to Mesoproterozoic, most being Labradorian (1.71-1.60 Ga), Pinwarian (1.52-1.46 Ga), or Elzevirian (ca. 1.35-1.19 Ga). Sedimentary basins and intrusive suites, including those with anorthosite massifs, host base metal (Zn), Fe- and hemo-ilmenite (Fe-Ti), and Fe oxide Cu-Au-REE-U deposits, and could collectively host Carlin, sedimentary exhalative, magmatic Ni-Cu-Co sulphides, PGE, Fe-Ti-V-P, and rare metal deposits. Recognized volcano-plutonic belts host some volcanogenic massive sulphide deposits or share hallmarks of volcanogenic massive sulphide, Fe oxide Cu- Au-REE-U, epithermal Au, and porphyry Cu deposits. The main aim of this synthesis is to inform and, through that information, disparage the wasteland paradigm that has afflicted the Grenville Province for so long. Compared to the Superior Province, the Grenville Province is under-explored, under-prospected, and under-mapped but as it is, to a large extent, a reworked equivalent of the Andes, there is no reason why it should not be as prospective. Like the known deposits, undiscovered deposits are likely to be metamorphosed and perhaps to have undergone ore mineral beneficia- tion providing a means to further increase the attractiveness of the Grenville Province. Résumé La Province de Grenville met à jour les racines profondes d’un ancien orogène de collision de type himalayen. Toutefois, la plupart de ses composantes se sont formées bien avant l’orogenèse de collision dans des milieux géotec- toniques de type andin. Les ceintures volcano-plutoniques d’arc qui se sont formées dans de tels milieux font main- tenant partie des complexes gneissiques qui caractérisent de grands segments de la Province de Grenville. Les âges des arcs magmatiques, des rifts intra-arc, des bassins d’arrière-arc avortés et des arcs insulaires déduits s’étalent de l’Archéen au Mésoprotérozoïque, la plupart étant du Labradorien (1,71-1,60 Ga), du Pinwarien (1,52 -1,46 Ga) ou de l’Elzévirien (env. 1,35-1,19 Ga). Les bassins sédimentaires et les suites intrusives, y compris celles englobant des mas- sifs d’anorthosite, renferment des gîtes de métaux usuels (Zn), de fer, d’hémo-ilménite (Fe-Ti) et d’oxydes de fer-Cu- Au-ÉTR-U, et pourraient, dans leur ensemble, être les hôtes de gîtes de type Carlin, de gîtes sedex, de gîtes de sulfures magmatiques à Ni-Cu-Co, de gîtes d’ÉGP et de Fe-Ti-V-P ou de gîtes de métaux rares. Les ceintures volcano-plu- toniques connues renferment quelques gisements de sulfures massifs volcanogènes ou présentent des caractéristiques métallogéniques propres à ces gîtes ou à celles des gîtes d’oxydes de fer-Cu-Au-ÉTR-U, des gîtes d’or épithermaux ou des gîtes porphyriques de cuivre. Cette synthèse vise à fournir de l’information qui devrait contribuer à changer le paradigme d’une Province de Grenville stérile. Comparée à la Province du lac Supérieur, la Province de Grenville a été insuffisamment explorée et cartographiée. Toutefois, dans une perspective de contextes géologiques de type andin, il n’y a aucune raison qui justifierait qu’elle ne soit pas métallifère. De la même manière que le sont les gîtes découverts, les gîtes non encore décelés ont de fortes chances d’être métamorphisés et leurs minerais auront peut-être subi un enrichissement métamorphique, ce qui augmente d’autant l’attrait pour l’exploration de la Province de Grenville. Introduction The Grenville Province (Fig. 1), with its predominantly high-grade metamorphic terranes and spectacular deep-level thrust stacks along ductile shear zones, has epitomized for years the roots of a Himalayan-style collisional orogen (Dewey and Burke, 1973; Rivers, 1983; Davidson, 1984). Recognition of the highly deformed and metamorphosed nature of the rocks and failure to discover mineral deposits among promising targets (e.g. the eastern extension of the Abitibi greenstone belt) brought intense scepticism about the mineral potential of the province and its gneissic “pinkstone” belts. The notion arose that metals must have been leached from original ore settings during high-grade metamorphism, leaving the province largely sterile even though it hosts Fe, Ti, Nb, U, Mo, and Zn deposits, some of them world-class (Fig. 2), and is renowned for its industrial mineral potential. A new paradigm is emerging from the recognition that the main crustal build-up of the Grenville Province is Andean in type (Rivers, 1997), that metamorphism is mostly isochemi- cal beyond devolatilization (H 2 O, CO 2 , and halides), and that undifferentiated gneiss complexes conceal volcano-plu- tonic belts fertile in Cu, Au, U, REE, etc. Although tectoni- cally buried deep in the crust at some stage of their history, many components of the Grenville Province were formed initially at or near surface, or in the mid-crust (see Fig. 1 in Bonnet and Corriveau, 2007). Hence, even among gneisses at granulite facies, such as those of the La Romaine Supracrustal Belt (Fig. 1), pyroclastic units with polygenic lappilistones and volcanic breccia can be preserved provid- ing clues to the presence of volcanosedimentary belts in oth- erwise fairly monotonous gneissic domains (Fig. 3). In this review, such geological terranes are considered globally as prospective as any others originally formed at low- to mid-
Transcript
Corriveau, L., Perreault, S., and Davidson, A., 2007, Prospecitive metallogenic settings of the Grenville Province, in Goodfellow, W.D., ed., Mineral Depositsof Canada: A Synthesis of Major Deposit-Types, District Metallogeny, the Evolution of Geological Provinces, and Exploration Methods: GeologicalAssociation of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special Publication No. 5, p. 819-847.
PROSPECTIVE METALLOGENIC SETTINGS OF THE GRENVILLE PROVINCE
LOUISE CORRIVEAU1, SERGE PERREAULT2, AND ANTHONY DAVIDSON3
1. Geological Survey of Canada, 490 de la Couronne, Quebec G1K 9A92. Ministère des Ressources naturelles et de la Faune du Québec, 545 boul. Crémazie est, bureau 1110,
The Grenville Province exposes the deep crustal root of a Himalayan-type collisional orogen. However, most of itscomponents predate collisional orogeny, and the main episodes of crustal build-up are Andean in type. Many of theensuing volcano-plutonic arc belts are now parts of the gneiss complexes that typify large segments of the GrenvilleProvince. Ages of inferred magmatic arcs, intra-arc rifts, aborted back-arcs and island-arcs components range fromArchean to Mesoproterozoic, most being Labradorian (1.71-1.60 Ga), Pinwarian (1.52-1.46 Ga), or Elzevirian (ca.1.35-1.19 Ga). Sedimentary basins and intrusive suites, including those with anorthosite massifs, host base metal (Zn),Fe- and hemo-ilmenite (Fe-Ti), and Fe oxide Cu-Au-REE-U deposits, and could collectively host Carlin, sedimentaryexhalative, magmatic Ni-Cu-Co sulphides, PGE, Fe-Ti-V-P, and rare metal deposits. Recognized volcano-plutonic beltshost some volcanogenic massive sulphide deposits or share hallmarks of volcanogenic massive sulphide, Fe oxide Cu-Au-REE-U, epithermal Au, and porphyry Cu deposits. The main aim of this synthesis is to inform and, through thatinformation, disparage the wasteland paradigm that has afflicted the Grenville Province for so long. Compared to theSuperior Province, the Grenville Province is under-explored, under-prospected, and under-mapped but as it is, to a largeextent, a reworked equivalent of the Andes, there is no reason why it should not be as prospective. Like the knowndeposits, undiscovered deposits are likely to be metamorphosed and perhaps to have undergone ore mineral beneficia-tion providing a means to further increase the attractiveness of the Grenville Province.
Résumé
La Province de Grenville met à jour les racines profondes d’un ancien orogène de collision de type himalayen.Toutefois, la plupart de ses composantes se sont formées bien avant l’orogenèse de collision dans des milieux géotec-toniques de type andin. Les ceintures volcano-plutoniques d’arc qui se sont formées dans de tels milieux font main-tenant partie des complexes gneissiques qui caractérisent de grands segments de la Province de Grenville. Les âges desarcs magmatiques, des rifts intra-arc, des bassins d’arrière-arc avortés et des arcs insulaires déduits s’étalent del’Archéen au Mésoprotérozoïque, la plupart étant du Labradorien (1,71-1,60 Ga), du Pinwarien (1,52 -1,46 Ga) ou del’Elzévirien (env. 1,35-1,19 Ga). Les bassins sédimentaires et les suites intrusives, y compris celles englobant des mas-sifs d’anorthosite, renferment des gîtes de métaux usuels (Zn), de fer, d’hémo-ilménite (Fe-Ti) et d’oxydes de fer-Cu-Au-ÉTR-U, et pourraient, dans leur ensemble, être les hôtes de gîtes de type Carlin, de gîtes sedex, de gîtes de sulfuresmagmatiques à Ni-Cu-Co, de gîtes d’ÉGP et de Fe-Ti-V-P ou de gîtes de métaux rares. Les ceintures volcano-plu-toniques connues renferment quelques gisements de sulfures massifs volcanogènes ou présentent des caractéristiquesmétallogéniques propres à ces gîtes ou à celles des gîtes d’oxydes de fer-Cu-Au-ÉTR-U, des gîtes d’or épithermaux oudes gîtes porphyriques de cuivre. Cette synthèse vise à fournir de l’information qui devrait contribuer à changer le paradigme d’une Province de Grenville stérile. Comparée à la Province du lac Supérieur, la Province de Grenville a étéinsuffisamment explorée et cartographiée. Toutefois, dans une perspective de contextes géologiques de type andin, iln’y a aucune raison qui justifierait qu’elle ne soit pas métallifère. De la même manière que le sont les gîtes découverts,les gîtes non encore décelés ont de fortes chances d’être métamorphisés et leurs minerais auront peut-être subi unenrichissement métamorphique, ce qui augmente d’autant l’attrait pour l’exploration de la Province de Grenville.
Introduction
The Grenville Province (Fig. 1), with its predominantlyhigh-grade metamorphic terranes and spectacular deep-levelthrust stacks along ductile shear zones, has epitomized foryears the roots of a Himalayan-style collisional orogen(Dewey and Burke, 1973; Rivers, 1983; Davidson, 1984).Recognition of the highly deformed and metamorphosednature of the rocks and failure to discover mineral depositsamong promising targets (e.g. the eastern extension of theAbitibi greenstone belt) brought intense scepticism about themineral potential of the province and its gneissic “pinkstone”belts. The notion arose that metals must have been leachedfrom original ore settings during high-grade metamorphism,leaving the province largely sterile even though it hosts Fe,Ti, Nb, U, Mo, and Zn deposits, some of them world-class(Fig. 2), and is renowned for its industrial mineral potential.
A new paradigm is emerging from the recognition that themain crustal build-up of the Grenville Province is Andean intype (Rivers, 1997), that metamorphism is mostly isochemi-cal beyond devolatilization (H2O, CO2, and halides), andthat undifferentiated gneiss complexes conceal volcano-plu-tonic belts fertile in Cu, Au, U, REE, etc. Although tectoni-cally buried deep in the crust at some stage of their history,many components of the Grenville Province were formedinitially at or near surface, or in the mid-crust (see Fig. 1 inBonnet and Corriveau, 2007). Hence, even among gneissesat granulite facies, such as those of the La RomaineSupracrustal Belt (Fig. 1), pyroclastic units with polygeniclappilistones and volcanic breccia can be preserved provid-ing clues to the presence of volcanosedimentary belts in oth-erwise fairly monotonous gneissic domains (Fig. 3). In thisreview, such geological terranes are considered globally asprospective as any others originally formed at low- to mid-
L. Corriveau, S. Perreault, and A. Davidson
820
Na
in
Su
pe
rio
r
Su
pe
rio
r
So
uth
ern
Ma
kko
vik
Ch
urc
hill
Pa
rau
toc
hth
on
All
oc
hth
on
Co
mp
osit
eA
rcB
elt
Cen
tral
Met
ased
imen
tary
Bel
t
Bai
e-C
om
eau
Qu
ébec
Ma
nic
ou
ag
an
R.
Sep
t-Île
s
Ch
ibo
ug
am
au
Ott
awa
Bla
nc
Sab
lon
LR
M
BB
PH
DL
HS
PC
a
Ma
LS
J
ca
lj
le
hj
ts
ml
ga
wi
cf
pi
gb
mm
hr
me
wa
md
qd
pm
SH
c
Cc
qc
qc
sj
na
na
sj
qc
al
ah
to
fr
el
ba
ps
br
ag
mu
ghsh
Long
Range
Long
Range
Mis
tass
iniG
p
Mis
tass
iniG
p
Otish
Gp
SealLake
Gp
SealLake
Gp
Huro
nia
n
Gp
Huro
nia
n
Gp
India
nH
ead
Range
India
nH
ead
Range
Ste
el
Mounta
inS
teel
Mounta
in
Gre
en
Mounta
ins
Gre
en
Mounta
ins
Bla
irR
iver
Bla
irR
iver
Ap
pa
lach
ian
Gre
nvill
efr
ont
AB
T
AB
T
AB
T
AB
T
AB
T
ABTA
BT
Gre
nvill
efr
ont
Gre
nvill
efr
ont
13-1
2/10
17/1
4,10
13/
13/
10
10
16/1
0
15-1
4/10
16/
27,1
8/17
,9
10
Labra
dor
Tro
ugh
App
alac
hian
fron
t
12/1
0
12/1
1
12/1
1
15-1
3/10
12/1
1
14/1
1
14-1
3
1514
9
11
11-1
0 15-1
3
10
1313
13
10
11
16
16
>14
?9
9
10
14
13
?
?
?11
-10
11
11
10
500
km
cc
500
km
Ca
na
da Qu
éb
ec
On
tari
o
La
bra
do
r
US
A
60°W
60°N
40°N
80°W S
UP
ER
IOR
PR
OV
.
Re
ad
ing
Pro
ng
MA
KK
OV
IKP
RO
V.
GR
EN
VIL
LE
PR
OV
INC
E
NA
INP
RO
V.
CH
UR
CH
ILL
PR
OV
.
Ne
wJ
ers
ey
Hig
hla
nd
s
1.3
-1.1
Ga
pa
ssiv
em
arg
ino
r
1.6
-1.5
Ga
pa
ssiv
em
arg
ino
r
1.3
-1.1
Ga
arc
/ba
ck
arc
-re
late
dro
cks
1.6
-1.3
Ga
arc
/ba
ck
arc
-re
late
dro
cks
ba
ck
arc
ba
ck
arc
Eclo
gite
occu
rre
nce
s
Ca
rbo
na
tite
co
mp
lex
AM
CG
an
dse
lecte
din
tru
sio
ns
Gn
eis
sic
do
ma
ins
of
un
ce
rta
ina
ffin
ity
La
teP
ale
op
rote
rozo
ico
rog
en
s
Mid
-Pa
leo
pro
tero
zo
ico
rog
en
s
Arc
he
an
cra
ton
s
B
mo
13/1
1
FIG
UR
E1.
Geo
logi
cal s
ubdi
visi
ons
of th
e G
renv
ille
Pro
vinc
e w
ith
depo
siti
on a
nd in
trus
ion
age
foll
owed
by
met
amor
phic
age
in g
eon
tim
e sc
ale.
Ter
rane
s (t
.) a
nd d
omai
ns (
d.):
ag,
Alg
onqu
in d
.; ah
, Adi
rond
ack
Hig
hlan
ds;
al, A
diro
ndac
k L
owla
nds;
ba,
Ban
crof
t t.;
br,
Bri
tt d
.; ca
, Cab
onga
t.;
cc, C
ape
Car
ibou
Riv
er a
lloc
htho
n; c
f, C
hurc
hill
Fal
ls t
.; el
, Elz
evir
t.;
fr, F
ront
enac
t.;
ga, G
agno
n t.;
gb,
Gro
swat
er B
ay t
.; gh
,G
o H
ome
d.; h
j, H
art J
aune
t.; h
r, H
awke
Riv
er t.
; le,
Lel
ukua
u t.;
lj, L
ake
Jose
ph t.
; M, M
usqu
aro
Lak
e ex
tens
ion
of w
a; m
d, m
arbl
e-ri
ch d
.; m
e, M
écat
ina
d.; m
l, M
olso
n L
ake
t.; m
m, M
ealy
Mou
ntai
ns t.
; mo,
Mor
in t
.; m
u, M
usko
ka d
.; na
, Nat
ashq
uan
Dom
ain;
PH
, Pit
ts H
arbo
ur G
roup
; pi
, Pin
war
e t.;
pm
, Por
tneu
f-M
auri
cie
d. i
nclu
ding
the
Mon
taub
an G
roup
; ps
, Par
ry S
ound
d.;
qc, Q
uebe
cia;
qd,
qua
rtzi
te-r
ich
d.;
sh,
Sha
wan
aga
d.;
to, T
omik
o t.;
ts,
Tsh
enuk
utis
h t.;
wa,
Wak
eham
Gro
up;
wl,
Wil
son
Lak
e t.
Sup
racr
usta
l un
its
wit
h hy
drot
herm
al a
lter
atio
n zo
nes
disc
usse
d in
tex
t: B
, B
ondy
Gne
iss
Com
plex
; B
B,
Bai
e de
Bra
dor a
ssem
blag
e; D
L, D
isap
poin
tmen
t Lak
e pa
ragn
eiss
; LR
, La
Rom
aine
Sup
racr
usta
l Bel
t. P
otas
sic
alka
line
plu
tons
of t
he K
ensi
ngto
n-S
koot
amat
ta s
uite
are
the
plut
ons
in b
lack
in th
e C
entr
al M
etas
edim
enta
ryB
elt.
Cc,
Cre
vier
car
bona
tite
; S
hc, S
aint
-Hon
oré
carb
onat
ite.
Prospective Metallogenic Settings of the Grenville Province
821
Nain
South
ern
Makkovik
Churc
hill
Bai
e-C
om
eau
Qu
ébec
Sep
t-Île
s
Ch
ibo
ug
amau
Ott
awa
Labra
dor
Tro
ugh
Gre
nvill
efr
ont
?
?
500
km
500
km
Ca
na
da Qu
éb
ec
On
tari
o
La
bra
do
r
US
A
60°W
60°N
40°N
80°W S
UP
ER
IOR
PR
OV
.
Re
ad
ing
Pro
ng
MA
KK
OV
IKP
RO
V.
GR
EN
VIL
LE
PR
OV
INC
E
NA
INP
RO
V.
CH
UR
CH
ILL
PR
OV
.
Ne
wJ
ers
ey
Hig
hla
nd
s
Zn
-Pb
SE
DE
Xty
pe
Zn
-Cu
-Ag
±A
u(P
b)
VM
Sty
pe
Cu
-Zn
-Ag
Se
de
xty
pe
Cu
-Fe
-RE
E±U
Fe
(Kiru
na
typ
e/
iro
nska
rn)
Fe
(Me
tam
orp
ho
se
dB
IF)
Ni-C
u(t
yp
e1
)
Ni-C
u(t
yp
e2
)
Ni-C
u(t
yp
e3
)
Mo
inska
rna
nd
pe
gm
atite
Cu
-Ag
±W
±A
uin
ska
rn
U-T
h
Fe
-Ti
Mo
nta
ub
an
Mo
nta
ub
an
Ne
wC
alu
me
t
Fa
rad
ay
Bic
roft
Hilt
on
La
c-É
do
ua
rd
Tio
Qu
erry
BayL
ob
ster
Bay
Lac
Turg
eon
Lac
Vo
lan
t
Lac
Vo
lan
t
Lac
Par
adis2E
Z
Pep
ple
rL
ake
Mo
un
tR
eed
De
La
Bla
che
Ch
ûte
s-d
es-
Pas
ses
McN
icke
l
B20
B30
No
rth
wes
t
Kw
yjib
oTo
rtu
e
Bo
ud
rias
Lac
Nad
eau
Du
ssau
lt
Active
min
es
Pa
st-
pro
du
cin
gm
ine
s
Pro
sp
ects
an
dsh
ow
ing
s
Intr
usi
on
du
Rés
ervo
ir
Tio
Mo
un
t-W
rig
ht
Hu
mp
hre
yM
ou
nt
Lu
ce
Lis
mer
’sR
idg
eL
acW
atso
nR
enzy
Lac
hab
el
Mar
mo
rato
nL
on
gL
ake
Dan
aL
ake
Lac
Mit
ain
e
Blo
om
Lak
e
Bu
rnt
Lak
e\E
mb
en
Mic
hel
inC
rote
au
Sto
rmL
etit
iaE
&W
No
tre-
Dam
e-d
e-la
-Mer
ci
Can
tley
Mo
nt-
Lau
rier
Lac
d’A
rgen
t
Lei
tch
Superior
Mis
tass
iniG
p
Mis
tass
iniG
p
Otish
Gp
Huro
nia
n
Gp
Huro
nia
n
Gp
Ba
lma
t-E
dw
ard
s
Po
stH
ill
Kit
ts
FIG
UR
E2.
Loc
atio
n of
min
es a
nd k
ey p
rosp
ects
in
the
Gre
nvil
le P
rovi
nce.
Abb
revi
atio
ns a
s in
Fig
ure
1.
crustal depths. That they are now tectonically juxtaposed andmetamorphosed may hamper their recognition but shouldnot affect significantly their potential in terms of resources.Variability in mapping coverage and quality of information,including map designations such as “undifferentiatedgneiss”, remains, however, a major impediment to explo-ration (see historical perspective in Davidson, 1998a andParsons et al., 2005). New knowledge of ore deposits,including metamorphosed and metamorphogenic ones,recent protolith studies in high-grade metamorphic terranes,and new research on continent-scale processes of metallo-genic significance provide means of identifying geotectonicenvironments prospective for mineral deposits in theGrenville Province. They illustrate the fertility of upperamphibolite- to granulite-facies terranes, even for golddeposits, and contribute new vectors to ore settings that arebound to improve the effectiveness of grass-roots explo-ration across the orogen (discussed in Bonnet and Corriveau,2007).
In this overview of the Canadian Grenville Province, thedetailed geological picture provided by Davidson (1998a)for the Decade of North American Geology, Volume 7 is notduplicated. Instead, the focus is placed on geological con-
texts that, we think, have particular significance for assess-ing the exploration potential of the orogen. Wherever possi-ble, a page link is provided to more exhaustive descriptionsand data in review papers that target the tectonic evolutionand the geology of the orogen (e.g. Easton, 1992; Rankin etal., 1993; Davidson, 1995, 1998a, b; Rivers, 1997; Carr etal., 2000; Rivers and Corrigan, 2000; Gower and Krogh,2002, 2003; Tollo et al., 2004) and its current mineralresources (Easton and Fyon, 1992; Sangster et al., 1992;Clark, 2000, 2001a; Gauthier and Chartrand, 2005). Thereader can also consult landmark volumes The GrenvilleProblem (Thompson, 1956; Osborne, 1956, p. 13), TheGrenville Province (Wynne-Edwards, 1972), The GrenvilleEvent in the Appalachians and Related Topics (Bartholomew,1984), The Grenville Province (Moore, 1986; Moore et al.,1986), Mid-Proterozoic Laurentia-Baltica (Gower et al.,1990), and Proterozoic Tectonic Evolution of the GrenvilleOrogen in North America (Tollo et al., 2004), as well asrecent special issues stemming from the Lithoprobe programand government and academia initiatives (Ludden andHynes, 2000a; Wardle and Hall, 2002; Corriveau and Clark,2005) and the International Geological Correlation Program(IGCP) Project No. 440 on the Assembly and Break-up of
L. Corriveau, S. Perreault, and A. Davidson
822
FIGURE 3. Granulite-facies lapillistone of the La Romaine Supracrustal Belt. (A) Polygenic lapillistone. (B) Monogenic rhyolitic lapillistone. (C) Shatteredlapilli. (D) Metarhyodacitic lapillistone. Note that the smaller size lapillis are flattened and defined a fabric whereas the larger one is not flattened and slightlyoblique to the fabric. This points to primary fabric development during deposition of hot pyroclastic material likely in a subaerial setting. (E) Accretionarylapilli.
A B
C
D
E
Prospective Metallogenic Settings of the Grenville Province
823
Rodinia (Meert and Powell, 2001). Metamorphism acrossthe Grenville Province and its orogenic significance are cov-ered in Berman et al. (2000), Easton (2000), and Rivers et al.(2002) and are not discussed in detail here. However, thepositive aspects of metamorphism on ore deposits (i.e. toupgrade the value of a deposit and facilitate its discovery),the major advances in understanding appropriate pathfindersfor metamorphosed ore deposits, and the largely isochemicalnature of metamorphism are taken into account in discussingmineral potential (see Bonnet and Corriveau, 2007). Finally,the Grenville Province hosts many industrial mineraldeposits (apatite, brucite, calcite, dolomite, feldspar, ferrianilmenite, graphite, kyanite, magnesite, mica, nepheline,rutile, sillimanite, talc, wollastonite; Hébert, 1993; Jacob andBélanger, 2001; Bellemare and Jacob, 2004). While address-ing herein the metallogenesis of the Grenville Province, wealso recognize the importance of exploration for industrialminerals in the orogen, but this subject is not covered per sein this synthesis.
Tectonic Subdivisions
Several lithotectonic and timing nomenclatures, reviewedin Davidson (1998a, p. 207-212) and Tollo et al. (2004), arecurrently in use for the Grenville Orogen. Among them, twopan-Grenville Province schemes are principally used: thetectonically based subdivisions of Rivers et al. (1989;adapted to take into account current understanding of theorogen) and the tectono-geographic subdivision of Wynne-Edwards (1972). In the former, the major lithotectonic ele-ments of the Grenville Province are divided into two main,semicontinuous, orogen-parallel, stacked belts known as theparautochthonous belt and the structurally overlyingallochthonous polycyclic belt, as well as into a series ofsupracrustal-dominated belts formerly grouped as theallochthonous monocyclic belt (Fig. 1).
The parautochthonous belt (parautochthon) consists ofsupracrustal and plutonic rocks of the proto-Laurentian cra-ton that were reworked to a major extent during theGrenvillian Orogeny, i.e., during the interval 1080 to 980 Ma(timing scheme of Gower and Krogh, 2002). These reworkedGrenville foreland components include 1) the Archeangreenstone and gneiss belts of the Superior and Nain cratons,2) the intervening Paleoproterozoic southeastern ChurchillProvince with reworked Archean core zones (2780-1740Ma; Wardle and Hall, 2002), and 3) the PaleoproterozoicSouthern, Central Plains and Makkovik provinces and theearly Mesoproterozoic Eastern Granite-Rhyolite Province(details in Davidson 1998a, p. 215-225). Individualsupracrustal units and intrusive suites of the foreland can, inmany cases, be correlated directly with those of theparautochthon, though metamorphic and structural rework-ing may be severe (Daigneault and Allard, 1994). In somecases, unit-to-unit correlations point to complexities thatinclude potential sedimentary facies changes and severe dis-ruption of foreland units (Davidson, 2001; LaFlèche et al.,2005). In other cases, foreland units are to a large extentobscured by voluminous intrusion of Late Paleoproterozoicand Mesoproterozoic plutons and batholiths (Gower andKrogh, 2003).
Grenville Province rocks have been thrust over and/orreversely faulted against those of the foreland along a series
of ductile to brittle faults and shear zones that truncate thestructural trends of the proto-Laurentian craton (see reviewin Ludden and Hynes, 2000b). These faults and shear zonesdefine the Grenville Front and mark the northwest boundaryof the Grenville Province (Davidson, 1998a, p. 218;Davidson, 2001). They are in some cases reactivated frompre-existing Archean to Proterozoic structures that haveacted as persistent crustal weaknesses (Corrigan et al., 2000;Krogh et al., 2002; Bandyayera et al., 2004). A well devel-oped foreland fold-and-thrust belt occurs in westernLabrador (Rivers et al., 1993) but evidence is mounting thatearly ductile thrusting was also significant in westernQuebec and preceded brittle reverse faulting (Bandyayera etal., 2004; Cadéron, written comm., 2005). Gravity and aero-magnetic signatures along the front are anomalous (e.g.major gravity low) and their trends truncate foreland gravityand aeromagnetic lineaments. Even though the front is not asuture, it is a major structure with crust-scale reverse faults,thrusts, and ramps (imaged in seismic transects) locally asso-ciated with a jump in Moho depth (imaged in a teleseismictransect) (Green et al., 1988; Davidson, 1998a, p. 251-253;Ludden and Hynes, 2000b; Martignole et al., 2000;Rondenay et al., 2000). One of the marked changes in crustalthickness occurs where the Grenville front zone extends tothe Moho and into the mantle southward along the Abitibi-Grenville seismic profile (Martignole et al., 2000). Abovethis zone, a large region of very low reflectivity is observedin the lower crust. This combination of features is also pres-ent directly under the world-class Olympic Dam iron-oxidecopper-gold (IOCG) deposit in the Gawler craton ofAustralia (Lyons et al., 2004) and may indicate a particularlyfertile crust at the southern end of the Cabonga terrane in thesouthwest Grenville Province (Fig. 1). Archean crust is cur-rently interpreted to underlie much of the orogen, graduallytapering to the southeast except in Ontario where it is inter-preted to form a thin substrate that extends across much ofthe orogen (Ludden and Hynes, 2000b).
The allochthonous polycyclic belt includes Paleo- andMesoproterozoic rocks that have been subjected to morethan one orogeny and thrust onto the parautochthon alongthe Allochthon boundary thrust (Fig. 1). These rocks, dis-placed with respect to their formation sites, are not for themost part exotic with respect to Laurentia. In fact, theallochthonous belt was largely built through latePaleoproterozoic and Mesoproterozoic magmatic eventsalong the Laurentian margin. In Quebec and Labrador, theAllochthon boundary thrust is clearly delineated by anabrupt change in aeromagnetic signature (Davidson, 1998a,p. 225). In Ontario, the location of this boundary fault is dif-ficult to assess based on aeromagnetic signature, but is nowwell established through mapping. In particular, difference inchemistry between 1.16 Ga coronitic metagabbro bodies inthe allochthonous belt and remants of the 1.24 Ga Sudburydyke swarm in the parautochthon served to refine its position(Ketchum and Davidson, 2000). A high-pressure belt, witheclogite-facies and high-pressure granulite-facies assem-blages, forms semicontinuously the structurally lowest seg-ments of the allochthonous polycyclic belt (Ludden andHynes, 2000b; Rivers et al., 2002). Recognition of this high-pressure belt is of metallogenic significance for Ti deposits(Cox and Indares, 1999; Gauthier and Chartrand, 2005).
The monocyclic belt was defined as consisting of theCentral Metasedimentary Belt, Morin terrane, AdirondackHighlands, and Wakeham Group on the basis that they werethought to have formed coevally during the 1.35 to 0.95 Ga“Grenvillian orogenic cycle” as defined by Moore andThompson (1980) (Rivers et al., 1989). This subdivision hasbeen superseded following age refinements for its proposedconstituents. In this contribution, we follow Tollo et al.(2004) after Rivers et al. (1989) and Carr et al. (2000) andrefer to the Wakeham terrane, the Composite Arc Belt andthe Frontenac-Adirondack-Morin Belt. The Composite ArcBelt, defined in Ontario, consists of 1.30 to 1.25 Ga carbon-ate and clastic sediments deposited coevally with mafic tofelsic volcanic rocks and associated intrusion of tonaliticplutons (Carr et al., 2000). It encompasses Elzevir andBancroft terranes in the Central Metasedimentary Belt , andperhaps the Parry Sound Domain in the Central Gneiss Belt(tectonic subdivision of Wynne-Edwards, 1972). In Bancroftterrane, hydrothermally altered volcanic rocks are now rec-ognized as having precursors with geochemical and isotopicsignatures diagnostic of Composite Arc Belt volcanic rocks(Peck and Smith, 2005), strengthening this interpretation. Incontrast, the inclusion of the Parry Sound Domain is moreconjectural, as its supracrustal component may be mucholder based on a poorly constrained 1350 Ma age for theWhitestone anorthosite and if so may be coeval with theMontauban Group as portrayed in Figure 1 (van Breemen etal., 1986). The northern extension of the Composite Arc Beltinto Quebec following Tollo et al. (2004) encompasses theentire Quebec segment of the Central Metasedimentary Belt,whereas in Carr et al. (2000) it encompasses solely its west-ern margin. This discrepancy is attributable to some majorknowledge gaps in the age and paleotectonic setting(s) of thesupracrustal rocks in western Quebec. Currently, a 1.45 to1.3 Ga volcano-plutonic continental arc and island arc havebeen documented and dated within structural windows of themarble-rich and quartzite-rich domains of the CentralMetasedimentary Belt in Quebec and within the LaBostonnais Plutonic Complex and Montauban Group of thePortneuf-Mauricie Domain (Fig. 1; Nadeau and vanBreemen, 1994; Nadeau et al., 1999; Nantel and Pintson,2002; Blein et al., 2003; Wodicka et al., 2004). Dated arccomponents within the 1.30 to 1.25 Ga age range arerestricted to a 1.28 Ga tonalite sheet at the southeastern endof the quartzite-rich domain (Cieselski and Sharma, 1995).Williams (1992) also reported arc tholeiite and boniniticbasalt in the region of the Calumet deposit and interpretedthem as an extension of the Elzevir terrane in Ontario. Thatthey also pointed out strong similarities with the MontaubanGroup rocks, now known to be 1.45 Ga in age, brings intoquestion the age of the Calumet deposit and its hostsupracrustal rocks. Previously considered coeval with theComposite Arc Belt, the age of the Wakeham terrane is nowbracketed between 1.6 and 1.5 Ga with upper stratigraphiclevels being bracketed between 1.52 and 1.50 Ga (Wodickaet al., 2003; van Breemen and Corriveau, 2005).
The parautochthonous and allochthonous belts and theComposite Arc Belt are subdivided into a number of terranes(defined as tectonically bounded segments of orogenic crustdistinguished from adjacent terranes on the basis of meta-morphic, structural, and age characteristics; e.g. Davidson,
1995) or domains. Details of the various terrane and domainsubdivisions and their settings can be found in Easton (1992),Wardle et al. (1997), Carr et al. (2000), and Gower and Krogh(2002). The various terranes are separated by majorGrenvillian shear zones that were active during thrust assem-bly and subsequently reactivated in some cases as exten-sional shear zones (Davidson, 1984; Hanmer, 1988; Culshawet al., 1997). In some allochthons, such as those of Ontario,high-strain gneiss is not restricted to domain boundaries butextends within the domains themselves, recording deepcrustal ductile flow subsequent to crustal thickening(Culshaw, 2005). Key structural elements associated withbuckling and shearing during ductile flow and lineated andfoliated (L-S) tectonites formed during shearing help deci-pher the contractional and extensional phases of theGrenville Orogeny (Culshaw, 2005; Schwerdtner et al.,2005).
Paleo- to Mesoproterozoic Magmatic Arcs and Related Events
The main crustal build-up of the Grenville Provinceoccurred through prolonged, 1.8 to 1.24 Ga, Andean-typecontinental arc and intracontinental back-arc magmatismwith some lateral accretion of magmatic arcs (Rivers, 1997;Hanmer et al., 2000; Gower and Krogh, 2002). The mainmagmatic arc events currently documented are associatedwith the late Paleoproterozoic Labradorian (1.71-1.60 Ga)and the Mesoproterozoic Pinwarian (1.52-1.46 Ga; Gowerand Krogh, 2002) and Elzevirian (ca. 1.35-1.19 Ga;McLelland et al., 1996) orogenies. Pre-Labradorian 1.8 to1.7 Ga rocks occur within and south of the parautochthon inthe eastern Grenville Province (Gower and Krogh, 2003) butappear to be restricted to the parautochthon in the westernGrenville Province (Ketchum and Davidson, 2000). Suchrocks are coeval with plutonism in the northern CentralPlains Orogen of the Midcontinent, which itself is the east-ward extension of the Yavapai Orogen of the southwestUnited States (Karlstrom et al., 2001). As such, this timeperiod was one of intense crustal build-up along the pre-Grenvillian Laurentian margin and its counterpart within theGrenville Province may be obscured by intense reworking(e.g. units of uncertain affinity in Fig. 1 of Ludden andHynes, 2000b). Among the crustal elements preserved and ofinterest are the Killarney volcanoplutonic complex andcoeval granites that intruded the Huronian Supergroup androcks of the southwestern Grenville Province in Ontario (e.g.Davidson and van Breemen, 1994; Rogers et al., 1995).Leucogranite, such as the Killarney granite and alliedhypabyssal and volcanic rocks, are only found at the south-west extremity of the Grenville Front near Killarney,whereas granodioritic plutons are distributed over a largerarea across the Southern and Grenville provinces. The plu-tonic rocks of the Killarney complex contain alteration zonesof interest for mineral exploration, in particular for Fe oxideCu-Au-U deposits, and are coeval with A-type granitoids inthe Makkovik Province that host several U prospects (Fig. 2;Davidson, 1986; Corriveau, 2007).
In Labrador, 1.68-1.65 Ga juvenile arc terranes are nowrepresented by strongly foliated or gneissic calc-alkalineintermediate to felsic rocks that have a distinct northwardpolarity of emplacement and are interpreted as having
L. Corriveau, S. Perreault, and A. Davidson
824
Prospective Metallogenic Settings of the Grenville Province
825
formed outboard of Laurentia above a south-dipping sub-duction zone (e.g. Lake Melville, Hawke River, andGroswater Bay terranes; Fig. 1). These rocks were accretedto pre-Grenvillian Laurentia, metamorphosed at high grade,migmatized and deformed, all before 1.65 Ga. The high pres-sure-temperature conditions reached led to local crystalliza-tion of sapphirine in pre-Labradorian supracrustal belts(Gower and Krogh, 2003, p. 156). The inferred suture thenbecame the site of 1.65 Ga transitional calc-alkaline toalkali-calcic felsic plutonism, volcanism and minor sedi-mentation. These rocks constitute the Trans-Labradorbatholith (Groswater Bay terrane) and associated northernsupracrustal sequences. Minor, coeval, and related felsic vol-canic and plutonic rocks are documented to the south in thePinware terrane. Coeval with the Trans-Labrador batholith isthe onset of large-scale, 1.65 to 1.62 Ga mafic-anorthositic-monzogranitic magmatism (Mealy Mountains IntrusiveSuite and coeval mafic layered intrusions in the MealyMountains terrane; Fig. 1). Contemporaneous emplacementof these distinct magmatic suites led Gower and Krogh(2003, p. 167) to reassess the origin of the Trans-Labradormagmatism as having formed through crustal thickeningafter collision and arrested subduction instead of being theproduct of continental arc magmatism above a north-dippingsubduction zone. Duchesne et al. (1999) proposed a crustaltongue-melting model for the formation of these anorthositemassifs, layered intrusions, and associated intrusive rocks.Arrested subduction and development of a passive marginafter the 1.7 to 1.6 Ga Labradorian Orogeny is compatiblewith the currently observed lapse in magmatism during geon15 and the deposition of the Wakeham Group, assuming it isa passive margin basin (Gower and Krogh, 2002, 2003).However, that interpretation conflicts with the presence of1.61 to 1.55 Ga inherited magmatic-like zircons in volcanicrocks stratigraphically overlying metasediments of theWakeham Group (deposited at ca. 1.51 Ga) and contempora-neous inheritance in nearby plutons (van Breemen andCorriveau, 2005). These geon 16 to 15 xenocrysts and thepresence of the Pinwarian magmatic arc volcanic rocks at theupper stratigraphic level of the Wakeham Group suggest alink between Wakeham Group sedimentation and arc tecton-ics and on-going subduction for geon 15 (van Breemen andCorriveau, 2005).
Both Pinwarian and Labradorian plutons intruded theeastern Grenville Province south of the Trans-Labradorbatholith and their lithologic similarity commonly makesthem indistinguishable without systematic dating (Gowerand Krogh, 2002; Heaman et al., 2004). Labradorian maficmagmatism is also documented in the Lelukuau terrane andthe Tshenukutish Domain (Fig. 1; Cox et al., 1998). Alongthe St. Lawrence coast, no Labradorian plutons have beenfound to date but inheritance in Pinwarian igneous rocks andNd model ages suggest that concealed Labradorian crustextends as far southwest as Sept-Îles, west of the WakehamGroup, and as far southeast as the Long Range inlier in theAppalachian Orogen of Newfoundland (Dickin, 2000, 2004;Heaman et al., 2002; van Breemen and Corriveau, 2005; Fig.1). Labradorian rocks are also documented in the westernGrenville Province of Ontario (e.g. Slagstad et al., 2004).
In contrast to Labradorian plutonism, major Pinwarian1.52 to 1.46 Ga plutonism is now known to extend from the
Pinware terrane of Labrador west to the Saguenay area in thecentral Grenville Province, north to the Lake Melville andMealy Mountain terranes of Labrador, and east to the LongRange inlier (Fig. 1; Tucker and Gower, 1994; Wasteneys etal., 1997; Corrigan et al., 2000; James et al., 2001; Nadeauand James, 2001; Gower and Krogh, 2002; Heaman et al.,2002, 2004; Dickin, 2004; Hébert and van Breemen, 2004).This plutonic activity is interpreted as a manifestation of anAndean-type continental margin magmatic arc above anorthwest-dipping subduction zone. The approximately 100 000 km2 of Quebecia ‘terrane’ stretching from the arc-related Portneuf-Mauricie Domain to the St-Jean Domain ofGobeil et al. (2003) has homogeneous 1.55 Ga TDM modelages and may represent an oceanic arc segment accreted toLaurentia during the Pinwarian Orogeny (Martin and Dickin,2005). Orogen-parallel rifts associated with the Pinwarianarc led to extrusion of 1.5 Ga intra-arc mafic to felsic vol-canic and pyroclastic rocks and deposition of sediments (LaRomaine Supracrustal Belt and southeastern extension of theWakeham Group at Musquaro Lake; Corriveau and Bonnet,2005). Subsequently these volcanic belts were subjected tointense, fault- and lithologically controlled hydrothermalalterations including Fe-oxide alteration and Cu mineraliza-tion (Bonnet et al., 2005). Farther north, Pinwarian maficintrusions and mafic dyke swarms, such as the Michael andShabogamo dyke swarms and the Rigolet diorite, are inter-preted as delineating an aborted intracontinental back-arcbasin, whereas xenocrystic zircons suggest that basementmay have an Archean component (Corrigan et al., 2000).
Pinwarian, ca. 1.48 to 1.45 Ga arc and back-arc magmatismis also documented in the allochthonous belt of Ontario andwas associated with the emplacement of A-type granitoids,suggesting intra-arc extension (e.g. Britt, Algonquin andMuskoka domains; van Breemen et al., 1986; Corrigan et al.,1994; Nadeau and van Breemen, 1998; Ketchum andDavidson, 2000; Slagstad et al., 2004). As in the Pinware ter-rane, Pinwarian arc rocks were metamorphosed at ca. 1.45 Gain Ontario (Ketchum et al., 1994; Gower and Krogh, 2002).Pinwarian crust also extends southward at least as far as theBlair River inlier in the Appalachian Orogen of Nova Scotia(Dickin, 2004; Fig. 1). The documented Pinwarian compo-nents attest to a major period of juvenile crustal addition in amagmatic arc along the Laurentian margin in geons 15 to 14with a potential genetic link to the Eastern Granite-RhyoliteProvince of the mid-continental United States (cf. vanBreemen and Davidson, 1988; Nadeau and van Breemen,1998; Bickford et al., 2000; Rivers and Corrigan, 2000;Culshaw and Dostal, 2002; Martin and Dickin, 2005).Slagstad et al. (2004) pointed out that the back-arc related A-type magmatism in the Muskoka Domain could be analo-gous to the 1.48 Ga A-type silicic and minor mafic magma-tism in the Granite-Rhyolite Province that host former Fe-oxide mines with IOCG affinities in the St. FrançoisMountains of Missouri (Lowell and Young, 1999; Lowelland Noll, 2001; Menuge et al., 2002). Renewed magmatismtook place in extensional arc settings at 1.36 and 1.38 Ga inthe parautochthonous and allochthonous belts in Ontario andQuebec (Sand Bay gneiss and Red Pine Chute orthogneiss;van Breemen et al., 1986; Slagstad et al., 2004; van Breemenand Currie, 2004) furthering the linkage with the mid-conti-nental United States and the renewed 1.38 Ga magmatism in
the St. François Mountains (Lowell and Noll, 2001). The1.36 Ga Sand Bay gneiss association in the ShawanagaDomain (Fig. 1) consists of felsic to intermediate gneiss,amphibolite with minor marble, calc-silicate and quartzitelayers interpreted as a bimodal volcanic suite with epiclastic,and Laurentia-derived clastic sediments (Culshaw andDostal, 1997; Rivers and Corrigan, 2000). Rhyolitic rocksfrom this belt and the Red Pine Chute orthogneiss displayunusual birdwing-shape rare earth element (REE) patternsdiagnostic of hydrothermal alterations. In the case of the RedPine Chute orthogneiss, this hydrothermal event has beendated at 1.03 Ga and is associated with the Kipawa syenite(van Breemen and Currie, 2004).
In the Central Metasedimentary Belt of Quebec, a seriesof granitic to tonalitic gneiss complexes form tectonic win-dows of 1.4 to 1.35 Ga, arc-related volcano-plutonic suitesamong the marble and quartzite domains (Corriveau andMorin, 2000). These gneiss complexes in the southern halfof the belt include high-silica rhyolite and metabasalt with aback-arc signature and gneissic rocks with island-arc affinity(Bondy Gneiss Complex, Fig. 1). They are interpreted as partof a former island arc built on a thin continental substrate(Blein et al., 2003; Wodicka et al., 2004). Coeval gneissesfarther north have a continental arc signature (Nantel andPintson, 2002). Such a juxtaposition of island arc and conti-nental arc material occurs farther east but at much lowermetamorphic grade. In the 1.45 Ga Montauban Group, islandarc volcanic rocks are particularly well preserved, whereasthe 1.41 to 1.38 Ga, calc-alkaline La Bostonnais PlutonicComplex provides evidence for continental arc magmatismalong Laurentia (Corrigan and van Breemen, 1997; Nadeauet al., 1999; Hanmer et al., 2000). The latter magmatic eventis interpreted to extend farther north into the Saguenay area(Hébert and van Breemen, 2004). Taken together, these datarecord a long-lived arc along the southeastern margin ofLaurentia. Information derived from surface geology, seis-mic reflection lines, and felsic to ultramafic xenoliths sug-gests that the intermediate and lower crust of the CentralMetasedimentary Belt in Quebec corresponds to a stack ofarc-related gneiss complexes interleaved with non-exposedquartzite-bearing supracrustal assemblages, mylonites, andmafic to ultramafic intrusive bodies (Corriveau and Morin,2000; Morin et al., 2005). The marble and quartzite domainsof the Central Metasedimentary Belt of Quebec may extendto the east into the Morin terrane and, if this conjecture wascorrect, they should be grouped with the Frontenac-Adirondack-Morin Belt. In that case, there may be little ofthe Central Metasedimentary Belt of Quebec that could beincluded in the Composite Arc Belt of Carr et al. (2000)assuming that these components are exotic, an issue thatremains open to debate (cf. Hanmer et al., 2000).
In the Composite Arc Belt, Elzevirian arc volcanic, plu-tonic, and mineralizing events have been well documentedand summarized in Easton and Fyon (1992) and Carr et al.(2000). The belt is interpreted as consisting of 1.29 to 1.28 Ga primitive volcanic arc, 1.28 to 1.27 Ga calc-alkalinevolcano-sedimentary island arc/back-arc and relatedtonalitic plutons, and 1.26 to 1.25 Ga bimodal rifted volcanicarc (back-arc) amalgamated between 1.25 and 1.24 Ga(poorly constrained deformation and metamorphism) andintruded by 1.24 to 1.22 Ga bimodal plutons. A series of min-
eral deposits are related to that last magmatic event.Evidence of coeval emplacement of tonalitic plutons in adja-cent metasedimentary terranes is rare and consists of a 1.28Ga tonalite among Grenville Supergroup metasedimentaryrocks of the Central Metasedimentary Belt of Quebec and1.32 to 1.30 Ga tonalites in the Adirondack Highlands.
Andean-type crust normally consists of widespread ratherthan isolated volcanic, volcano-plutonic, and volcano-sedi-mentary belts in association with plutonic activities in arcs,successor arcs, intracontinental back arcs, and accreted arcs.As illustrated above, widespread arc-related volcanic activ-ity is well documented in the low-grade metamorphic ter-ranes of the Grenville Province (Composite Arc Belt andMontauban Group; Nadeau et al., 1999; Carr et al., 2000). Incontrast, extensive volcanic belts related to the successivearc build-up of the Grenville Province are currently rare inthe high-grade metamorphic terranes but increasingly thereare hints that the Paleo- to Mesoproterozoic arc componentsare not solely plutonic or emplaced at mid- to deep crustallevels. Conclusive evidence of volcanism is found in associ-ation with the 1.74 Ga Killarney granite, the Trans-Labradorbatholith, the southeastern margin of the Wakeham Group,the La Romaine Supracrustal Belt (as illustrated in Fig. 3),and the Bondy Gneiss Complex, and geochemically inferredrhyolitic rocks occur in the Shawanaga Domain (Fig. 1;Davidson, 1986; Gower, 1996; Blein et al., 2003; Slagstad etal., 2004; Corriveau and Bonnet, 2005). Of these, three beltshost fertile hydrothermal alteration zones and will bedescribed in further detail in subsequent sections. Late- topost-tectonic magmatic successor events to these arc eventsare also proving fertile.
Sedimentary Basins
Paleo- to Mesoproterozoic sedimentary basins preservedin the Grenville Province include (1) the extensions of olderbasins from the Grenville foreland; (2) the PaleoproterozoicDisappointment Lake gneisses and correlative units in theLac Joseph, Churchill Falls, and Wilson Lake terranes(Gower et al., 2002; Gower and Krogh, 2003, p. 152-153;Korhonen and Stout, 2004); (3) the supracrustal rocks in theTomiko terrane (≤1.68 to ≥1.25 Ga; Easton, 2003a); (4) the1.6 to 1.5 Ga Wakeham Group (Gobeil et al., 2003); and (5)the ca. 1.3 to 1.2 Ga Grenville Supergroup in the CompositeArc Belt, the Frontenac-Adirondack-Morin Belt, and theNew Jersey Highlands and Reading Prong inliers (Fig. 1;Wynne-Edwards, 1972). Metasedimentary rocks also occuras irregular belts among Labradorian, Pinwarian, andyounger gneissic rocks. These include the MontaubanGroup, its migmatitic counterparts and the St-Bonifacemetasedimentary rocks in the Portneuf-Mauricie Domain(Nadeau et al., 1992; Corrigan and van Breemen, 1997), the1.5 Ga Saguenay Gneiss Complex near Saguenay (Hébertand van Breemen, 2004), and tracts of paragneiss in theManicouagan, Baie-Comeau, Sept-Îles, Manitou, and BlancSablon area in Quebec, Parry Sound, Britt, Algonquin, andGo Home domains in Ontario, and Pinware terrane andMecatina Domain in Labrador (Davidson, 1998a; Gobeil,1997; Gower et al., 2002; Gower and Krogh, 2003, p. 158;Fig. 1E-1 in Perreault and Moukhsil, 2003). The FlintonGroup in the Composite Arc Belt (Moore and Thompson,
L. Corriveau, S. Perreault, and A. Davidson
826
Prospective Metallogenic Settings of the Grenville Province
827
1980) is much younger (ca. 1.1 Ga; Sager-Kinsman andParrish, 1993).
Among the Grenville foreland extensions, those of thePaleoproterozoic Huronian and Kaniapiskau supergroupsand the Archean Pontiac Group are the most extensive. Theywere deeply infolded into the crust long before the GrenvilleOrogeny and this may have fostered their preservation. Incontrast, the Otish Group only extends into the GrenvilleProvince as small faulted remnants whereas the adjacentMistassini Group stops at the Grenville Front (Davidson,1998a, p. 215-225).
In Labrador, the Paleoproterozoic Disappointment Lakegneiss, and its correlatives, form a 400 km long, tectonicallydismembered, arc-related supracrustal package found withinthe Lac Joseph, Churchill Falls, and Wilson Lake terranes(Thomas et al., 2000; Gower et al., 2002). This supracrustalbelt comprises pelitic to semipelitic rocks with minorquartzite and calc-silicate rocks in granulite facies, and rareamphibolite with textural evidence for an origin as pillowbasalt. Deposition age is currently bracketed between 1.8and 1.7 Ga.
Metasedimentary rocks in the Tomiko terrane of Ontariocomprise quartz arenite, calc-silicate rock, quartz-muscovitegneiss, feldspathic gneiss, and locally marble and Mn-richmagnetite-chert Fe formation associated with amphibolegneiss, aluminous gneiss, and B- and Mn-rich gneiss withgarnet and tourmaline. Complex relationships among min-eral parageneses suggest polyphase hydrothermal activity toform the Mn-, B-, Al-, and Fe-rich units. Amphibolites occurbut are of uncertain origin (mafic sills or volcanic flows).The area is considered prospective for Broken Hill-type min-eralization (Easton, 2003a). This metasedimentary sequenceextends northeastward into Quebec. The deposition age iscurrently bracketed between 1.68 and 1.25 Ga. However, aPaleoproterozoic age is favoured based on the restricted zir-con population of a sample dated at 1687 ± 20 Ma (whichmay point to a volcaniclastic origin) and on Nd/Sm modelages, which are 400 to 500 million years older than those ofthe Grenville Supergroup in Frontenac terrane (Krogh, 1989;Easton, 2003a, p. 17).
The Wakeham Group in the eastern Grenville Provinceforms a large sedimentary basin (Fig. 1) interpreted as orig-inally extending farther north with current septa within theMecatina Domain, farther west as the Manitou and BaieComeau sediments and farther east at least as far as the LaRomaine Supracrustal Belt and likely beyond into the Saint-Augustin complex of the Pinware terrane (James et al., 2002;Perreault and Heaman, 2003; Corriveau and Bonnet, 2005).East of St. Augustin, in Pinware terrane, dated metasedi-mentary units have a Labradorian age (Gower and Krogh,2002) but without systematic U-Pb geochronology it isunclear to what age groups the various metasedimentaryrocks of this terrane belong.
Formerly ranked as a supergroup and subdivided into twodistinct volcano-sedimentary groups, 1.24 Ga in age(Martignole et al., 1994), the Wakeham Group is now knownto be essentially arenaceous, largely devoid of volcanicrocks, and either in tectonic or intrusive contact with 1.5 Gagneiss complexes and their intrusive suites (Gobeil et al.,2003). Isotopic signatures and 1.6 to 2.6 Ga detrital zircon
age distributions are similar for the two former groups and,with field relationships, make a two-fold subdivision unnec-essary (Gobeil et al., 2003; Wodicka et al., 2003; Y. Larbi,pers. comm., 2004). Based on the above age constraints, themain sedimentary sequence must be older than 1.5 Ga andyounger than 1.6 Ga (Larbi et al., 2003; Wodicka et al.,2003). In the Musquaro Lake sector, at the eastern margin ofthe Wakeham Group, the presence of Pinwarian 1.52 Gadetritus in arenaceous sediments overlain by 1.51 and 1.50 Gafelsic volcanic and pyroclastic rocks, permits the age of sed-imentation to be bracketted between 1.52 and 1.50 Ga (vanBreemen and Corriveau, 2005). The nature of the sandstonesand the age of detrital zircons indicate a largely cratonicsource comprising Archean and Proterozoic rocks with localvolcanic or plutonic detritus of 1.52 Ga (Wodicka et al.,2003; van Breemen and Corriveau, 2005). The sedimentarypackage of the Wakeham Group is not diagnostic of a uniquetectonic setting. Sedimentation in a passive margin setting iscommonly invoked but deposition in an aborted back-arc isan attractive alternative as volcanic rocks overlying sedi-ments bear a continental arc magmatic signature (Rivers andCorrigan, 2000; Y. Larbi, pers. comm., 2004; Corriveau andBonnet, 2005). The group has Cu-Au-Ag epigenetic miner-alization at the interface between quartzite and mafic rocksin association with aluminous gneiss and tourmalinite(Clark, 2003).
The Grenville Supergroup encompasses several metased-imentary successions for which basin correlation remainuncertain (Moore, 1986; Davidson, 1998a, p. 235) and age ofdeposition is either unconstrained, bracketed between 1.30(detrital zircon) and 1.18 Ga (oldest pluton from theFrontenac plutonic suite) as in Ontario, or to pre-1.2 Ga inQuebec and pre-1.23 Ga in Ontario (Sager-Kinsman andParrish, 1993; Davidson, 1998a, p. 238; Corriveau and vanBreemen, 2000). In Quebec, a 1.2 Ga zircon age, interpretedas a maximum age of deposition (Friedman and Martignole,1995), has been reinterpreted as metamorphic in origin basedon other regional data (Corriveau and Morin, 2000, p. 249).Hence, the age of the metasedimentary rocks in westernQuebec still needs to be established. In Ontario, the FlintonGroup overlies the Grenville Supergroup and 1.25 Ga plu-tonic rocks and carries detrital zircon as young as ca. 1.15 Ga(Sager-Kinsman and Parrish, 1993), providing evidence fordistinctly younger sedimentation in this part of the orogen.
The former La Romaine Domain of the eastern GrenvilleProvince (Perreault and Heaman, 2003) was interpreted as aroughly 600 km2 metasedimentary belt with “meta-arkose”and rare pelite, quartzite, conglomerate, and marble. Manyof the markers, likely used to suggest a sedimentary originfor the domain gneisses, can be demonstrated to consist ofgranitic dykes with striking magmatic layering (Fig. 4),dioritic intrusive breccia and cogenetic enclaves, orthogneisswith spectacular deformation features, a series of metamor-phosed lapillistone, felsic tuff with aluminous nodules andveins, as well as aluminous gneiss, nodular gneiss, ironstone,calc-silicate, and carbonaceous rocks of hydrothermal originand subsequently metamorphosed (Corriveau et al., 2002;Corriveau and Bonnet, 2005). Reassessment of this domainas a series of continental arc-related plutons with coeval nar-row intra-arc volcano-sedimentary basins illustrates the cur-rent state of knowledge in many of the gneiss complexes of
the Grenville Province. This volcano-plutonic environmentis discussed below in the section on prospective arc settings.
Large-Scale Magmatic Events
Anorthosite-Mangerite-Charnockite-Granite, and MaficMagmatism
Emplacement of large anorthosite massifs and coevalbatholiths of mangerite-charnockite-granite (AMCG suites)marks periods of post-orogenic activity or reactivation fol-lowing the Labradorian, Pinwarian, Elzevirian andGrenvillian orogenies (e.g. McLelland et al., 1996; Gowerand Krogh, 2003). In most cases, coeval layered mafic intru-sions also occur (Fig. 5). For example, the oldest AMCGsuite, the post-orogenic, 1.65 to 1.62 Ga Mealy MountainsIntrusive Suite, is coeval with the Grady Island layeredmafic intrusion, the White Bear Arm complex, the OssokMountain intrusive suite, and the Alexis River layeredanorthosite (Gower and Krogh, 2003, p. 160-163). Althoughcoeval, distribution of the layered intrusions is commonlyspatially distinct from the AMCG intrusions, and their coge-netic character is uncertain. Potentially coeval with MealyMountain magmatism and intruded by Pinwarian-age maficto ultramafic, layered intrusions are the granulite-faciesmafic sills of the Hart Jaune terrane (e.g. 1.51 Ga Réservoirintrusion; Clark, 2000; Indares and Dunning, 2004). A maficrim is observed around some anorthosite massifs, such as inthe Havre St.-Pierre, Pentecôte, De La Blache, and Tortueanorthosites and components of the Lac St Jean anorthosite(e.g. Gobeil et al., 1999, 2002). The 1.37 to 1.35 GaPentecôte anorthosite massif, its marginal mafic to ultra-mafic intrusion, and associated felsic plutons are coeval withthe 1.37 Ga Matamec mafic-silicic layered intrusion andmineralized 1.35 Ga gabbro dykes (Martignole et al., 1993;Saint-Germain and Corriveau, 2003; Nabil et al., 2004), theca. 1.35 Ga Whitestone anorthosite in the Parry SoundDomain, and the 1.33 Ga De La Blache anorthosite massif(Gobeil et al., 2002). Though lesser magmatic activity is cur-rently reported for geon 13 than geons 16, 15, and 12, moreand more mafic and anorthosite intrusions of that age rangeare being dated as coeval with the calc-alkaline intrusions ofthe Dysart Suite, La Bostonais Complex and other gneiss
complexes in the southwestern and central GrenvilleProvince (Rivers and Corrigan, 2000, p. 364).
Emplacement of the very large, 1.17 to 1.13 Ga Marcy,Morin, Lac St. Jean, Havre St. Pierre, and Fournier AMCGsuites implies significant addition to the crust in geon 11 inthe central part of the Grenville Province (Martignole et al.,2000; Wodicka et al., 2003; Hamilton et al., 2004). Hostrocks were strongly deformed and metamorphosed prior toemplacement for the Morin and Lac St. Jean AMCG suites(Martignole et al., 2000; Hébert and van Breemen, 2004). Incontrast, host and members of the Havre St. Pierre andMarcy AMCG suites were subjected to high-grade metamor-phism and deformation related to the Grenville Orogenyafter anorthosite massif emplacement (Wodicka et al., 2003;Hamilton et al., 2004). However, in the Havre St. Pierreanorthosite, field evidence indicates that anorthosite recrys-tallization is in part related to emplacement. A few maficdykes have delaminated their anorthositic hosts and the septadisplay ptygmatitic and sheath folds solely related to theirentrainment by the mafic magmas. Such field observations,among others, illustrate the extremely ductile behaviour ofanorthosite at high temperature, and by inference, the easewith which they recrystallize during emplacement.
The anorthosite massifs discussed above belong to thelabradorite type but a younger suite of andesine anorthositewas also emplaced in the ca. 1.06 to 1.01 Ga interval (Owensand Dymek, 2005). In areas where waning of the GrenvilleOrogeny occurred by ca. 1.05 Ga, late to post-orogenicanorthosite suites are documented (e.g. 974 Ma Vieux-FortAnorthosite, Heaman et al., 2004). Some of them have mag-matic Fe-Ti mineralization (e.g. Rivière au Tonnerreanorthosite, Gobeil et al., 2003; 1.02 Ga Labrievilleanorthosite suite, Hébert et al., 2005).
Three models are currently invoked for the formation ofAMCG suites in the Grenville Province: (1) lithosphericdelamination associated with orogenic collapse (e.g.McLelland et al., 1996; Corrigan and Hanmer, 1997), (2) delamination-related melting of underthrust mafic crust(Gauthier et al., 2004c following the model of Duchesne etal., 1999), and (3) mantle plume (Gobeil et al., 2003). Thetwo late- to post-orogenic models challenge long-invoked
L. Corriveau, S. Perreault, and A. Davidson
828
FIGURE 4. Granitic dykes with magmatic layering presenting an appearance of meta-arkoses. (A) Apophyses are found in a few dykes. (B) Some of the lay-ering is coarse grained but most are fine grained.
A B
Prospective Metallogenic Settings of the Grenville Province
829
anorogenic models stemming from Emslie (1978), and con-vergent rather than purely extensional settings have beenproposed for the Lac St Jean and Morin anorthosites(Higgins and van Breemen, 1996; Corriveau and Morin,2000).
Other mafic intrusions (Fig. 5) form (1) swarms of maficdykes such as the 1.47 Ga Shabogamo, 1.43 Ga Michaelgabbro, 1.25 Ga Mealy, and 1.24 Ga Sudbury dyke swarms(Connelly et al., 1995; Bethune, 1997; Emslie et al., 1997;Rivers and Corrigan, 2000; Davidson, 2001); (2) mafic toultramafic sills such as the Robe noire and Lac Renzy sills(Clark, 2000; Scherrer, 2003); (3) metamorphosed,deformed, folded, or tilted layered intrusions such as the2.47 Ga River Valley anorthosite-gabbro intrusion, 1.63 GaWhite Bear Arm complex, the 1.29 Ga Blanc-Sablon gab-broic complex, and the 1.07 Ga Musquaro intrusion(Corriveau et al., 2002; Easton, 2003b; Gower and Krogh,
2003; Heaman et al., 2004); (4) coronitic metagabbro such asthose of the allochthonous belt in Ontario and Quebec(Ketchum and Davidson, 2000); (5) syntectonic mafic-felsicsheet intrusions emplaced in steep deformation zones such asthose of the Chevreuil suite (Corriveau and van Breemen,2000); (6) mafic intrusions with primary vertical layeringsuch as the Montjoie and Diable intrusions (ibid) or coevalgabbro and anorthosite bodies, some with layering, in theFrontenac plutonic suite (Davidson and van Breemen, 2000);and (7) collapsed mafic-silicic layered intrusions (MASLI)such as the Matamec complex (Saint-Germain andCorriveau, 2003). Many of these different intrusion typeshave Ni-Cu magmatic sulphide potential (Wilson, 1993;Clark, 2000). A few of the mafic dyke swarms extend intothe Grenville from the foreland where they are not deformed:Shabogamo, Sudbury and probably Michael gabbro dykeswarms.
Schefferville
NOUVELLE-
ÉCOSSE
Havre-Saint-PierreChibougamau
MontréalMontréal
Ivry
Desgrosbois
Saint-Hippolyte
FurnaceCoulombe East & WestGeneral ElectricBignelGlen
Lac Brulé
Lac Dissimieu
Lac La Blache
Rivière Pentecôte
Canton Arnaud
QIT - Tio Mine
Everett
Big Island
MagpieLac Raudot
Mine Canada Iron
Saint-Charles
La Hache-Est
Buttercup
QuébecQuébec
Hull-Ottawa
Hull-Ottawa
Val-d'OrVal-d'Or
Lac
Saint-Jean
Lac
Saint-Jean
ChicoutimiChicoutimi
ManicouaganManicouaganRéservoirRéservoir
LacMistassini
LacMistassini
FermontFermont
70º 60º80º
78º 70º
46º
50º
54º
46º
Data from the MRNQ unpublisheddeposits files. Modified from Clark, 2000.
Magnetite - ilmenite - apatite (Fe-Ti-P O ) deposits2 5
DLBA
HSPA
FIGURE 5. Distribution of anorthosite massifs and major mafic intrusions and their Fe-Ti deposits in the Quebec and Labrador segments of the GrenvilleProvince. Anorthosite massifs: ARA, Alexis River; BEA, Berté; LA, Labrie; DLBA, De La Blache; HSPA, Havre-Saint-Pierre; LFA, Lac Fournier; LSJA,Lac Saint-Jean; LVA, Lac Vaillant; MA, Morin; PA, Pambrun; PMA, Petit-Mécatina; RAA, Atikonak River; RPA, Rivière Pentecôte; SA, Shawinigan; SUA,Saint-Urbain; TA, Tortue; . Mafic intrusions and intrusive complexes: GI, Grady Island; M, Musquaro; MMIS, Mealy Mountains; MT, Matamec; OM, OssokMountain; R, Raudot; SILC, Sept-Îles; WBA, White Bear Arm. Sills: R, Renzy; RN, Robe Noire. GF, Grenville Front.
Other Magmatic EventsThe late-stage magmatic suites in the Grenville Province
are numerous and document key elements in the evolution ofthe orogen. Many are prospective for IOCG, Mo, U, andother base, precious, strategic, and rare metals (Haynes,1986; Gower, 1992; Eckstrand et al., 1996). For example,late magmatic events with A-type granitic affinity gave riseto a spectrum of 1.05 Ga U-Th-Nb-REE and Mo-enrichedpegmatites and skarns in the Central Metasedimentary Beltof Ontario and Quebec, to IOCG-type 1.04 Ga mineraliza-tion in the Adirondack Highlands, and to the ca. 1 Ga IOCGKwyjibo deposit in the Canatiche Complex of easternQuebec (Gauthier et al., 2004a; Selleck et al., 2004; Clark etal., 2005; Lentz and Creaser, 2005; D. Lentz, per. comm.,2004). Alkaline rocks, including nepheline syenite, form (1) series of intrusions such as those of the 1.09 to 1.07 GaKensington-Skootamatta potassic alkaline plutonic suite(Corriveau and Gorton, 1993), (2) metasomatic rock com-plexes such as the 1.03 Ga Kipawa syenite (van Breemenand Currie, 2004), and (3) lenses among gneisses such as theone in the Manitou gneiss complex (Chevé et al., 1999) andthe 1.17 Ga Cabonga Nepheline Syenite Complex in theCabonga terrane (Hudon et al., 2006). Details of some lateintrusion-related metallogenic settings are described in themetallogenic section. Finally, post-Grenvillian carbonatiteintrusions (Crevier, Saint-Honoré, Oka and Manitou Islands)and the 564 ± 4 Ma Sept-Îles mafic layered intrusion are hostto subeconomic to currently mined strategic metals deposits(including Nb at the St-Honoré, formerly Niobec, mine, andilmenite and apatite at Sept-Îles) but are not discussed fur-ther in this synthesis (see Richardson and Birkett, 1996;Cimon and McCann, 2000; Higgins, 2005).
Grenvillian Tectonics
The Grenvillian (1.08-0.98 Ga) Orogeny, as defined byGower and Krogh (2002), is the only one that affected nearlythe entire orogen, from the eastern Grenville Province to theAdirondack Highlands and the Appalachian inliers, south toTexas and Mexico (Tollo et al., 2004 and references therein).This event encompasses the Ottawan and Rigolet events ofRivers and Corrigan (2000). It gave rise to a mountain beltwith a strike length the scale of the Himalaya and to the cur-rent-day collisional architecture. In contrast, the Elzevirianand Shawinigan (1.18-1.13 Ga) events mostly affected theGrenville Province in Ontario and western Quebec(Davidson, 1995; Carr et al., 2000; Rivers and Corrigan,2000).
During the Grenvillian Himalayan-type event, extensivecrustal thickening and tectonic extrusion led to widespreadhigh-grade metamorphism (Ludden and Hynes, 2000b).Areas not pervasively reworked in the process commonlypreserve earlier metamorphic imprints (e.g. Archean meta-morphism in parts of the Parautochthon of Quebec; Gariépyet al., 1990; Berclaz et al., 1995; Bandyayera et al., 2004). Inthe Central Metasedimentary Belt of Quebec, only minorshearing and a weak resetting of metamorphosed marble andpost-peak metamorphism skarns are observed after 1.1 Ga(Corriveau et al., 1998; Martignole et al., 2000; Peck et al.,2005). In Labrador, Grenvillian tectonics involved thick-skinned imbrication of Labradorian terranes. As a result,
large segments of the parautochthonous and allochthonousbelts have not been pervasively reworked and do not have astrong tectonothermal record of the Grenville Orogenyexcept along major shear zones (e.g. Mealy Mountain ter-rane, Gower, 1996; Cape Caribou River allochthon, Kraussand Rivers, 2004). These areas and many others across theGrenville Province provide evidence that strain partitioninghas strongly controlled the extent of preservation of pre-Grenvillian rocks and metamorphic imprints (e.g. Ketchumet al., 1994; Corriveau et al., 1998; Boggs and Corriveau,2004).
Geological Environments of Metallogenic Deposits
In the Grenville Province, SEDEX and volcanogenic mas-sive sulphide deposits associated with metasupracrustalbelts, Fe-Ti oxides and Ni-Cu sulphides associated withanorthositic rocks (AMCG suites) and gabbro, and varioustypes of mineralization (Fe, U, Mo, REE, Nb, etc.) associ-ated with skarn, pegmatite, and carbonatite intrusions anchorour collective view of the prospective metallogenic settings.Sixty-two deposits are listed in Eckstrand et al. (1996, Fig.3A) for the Grenville Province; twenty-three are in Ontarioand none are in Labrador, although Baltic shield metallogenyof 1.7 to 1.5 Ga terranes in Norway, Sweden, or Finland isstrongly relevant to Labrador and supports mineral potentialof the area (Gower, 1992). In this section, we review settingsthat the authors think warrant investigation or reinvestiga-tion of their mineral potential. These are outlined in twogroups: environments that extend from the foreland into theGrenville Province, and those specific to the province itself.
Extension of Metallogenic Districts from the GrenvilleForeland
Metallogenic settings within the various geologicprovinces northwest of the Grenville Front extend from theforeland into the parautochthonous belt of the GrenvilleProvince. In contrast, many of their known mining districtsabut against the Grenville Front. A key exception is theworld-class Mount Wright Fe mine (Eckstrand et al., 1996;Stanaway, 1996). We would advocate that exploration poten-tial of these extensions in terms of pre-existing ore depositsshould largely mimic that of the foreland itself and that theextensions remain in many cases under-explored (e.g.Allard, 1978, 1979).
Archean Greenstone Belts
Archean greenstone belts that extend from the Superiorinto the Grenville Province have been deformed and intrudedby mafic magmas during the Mesoproterozoic and are nowconsidered prospective for Archean to Mesoproterozoic Cu-Ni-Co-PGE deposits, Archean volcanogenic massive sul-phide deposits and Archean or Mesoproterozoic mesother-mal gold deposits (Allard, 1978, 1979; Cadéron et al., 2004).If present, Archean orebodies will be metamorphosed toamphibolite or granulite facies as those in northeast SuperiorProvince (Archer et al., 2004) and exploration strategies insuch non-classical exploration territories will need to beadapted accordingly (Bonnet and Corriveau, 2007).
The southeast limit of Archean crust at depth as outlinedin Rivers (1997) and following interpretations of Ludden andHynes (2000b) are interpreted by Gauthier et al. (2004a, c)
L. Corriveau, S. Perreault, and A. Davidson
830
Prospective Metallogenic Settings of the Grenville Province
831
to have metallogenic significance for magmatic Ni-Cu-Cosulphide, platinum-group elements (PGE), Fe-Ti oxides, andFe oxide Cu-Au (IOCG) deposits.
Early Paleoproterozoic Platinum Group ElementMineralization
At the boundary between the Superior and Southernprovinces, rift-related 2.49 to 2.44 Ga mafic intrusions (EastBull Lake intrusive suite) are mineralized with platinumgroup elements (PGE; Vogel et al., 1998; James et al., 2002;Vaillancourt et al., 2003). This plutonic suite extends east-ward into the Grenville Province of Ontario, where the 2.45 Ga River Valley anorthosite-gabbro intrusion is nowundergoing active exploration for PGE (Dana Lake andLismer’s Ridge prospects; Easton, 2003b). This magmatismis coeval with volcanism at the base of the HuronianSupergroup and is related to the plume event that gave riseto the major Matachewan dyke swarm. By analogy, Clark(2001b, slide 36) points out that the area south of the 2.47 GaMistassini dyke swarm in the foreland may also host suchintrusions prospective for PGE mineralization. However, todate that area remains largely uncharted.
Metamorphosed Iron Formation
The Paleoproterozoic Kaniapiskau Supergroup extendsfrom the New Quebec Orogen (Labrador Trough) intoGagnon terrane of the Grenville parautochthon. TheWabush-Lac Jeannine Fe ore belt, notably the Mount WrightFe mine, is hosted within this southward extension (Figs. 2,6; Clarke, 1977). In the New Quebec Orogen, most of theiron formations, referred to as taconite (Gross, 1996), arefound in the Sokoman Formation. The Wabush Formation isits metamorphosed equivalent south of the Grenville Front(Figs. 1, 7; Neal, 2000). What was originally a continuousbelt of Fe formations with quartzite, calcareous anddolomitic carbonate, and shale becomes across the front adismembered belt of folded and oval-shaped Fe orebodiesassociated with quartzite, calcitic and dolomitic marble,calc-silicate rock, and aluminous and graphitic paragneissdistributed, in a northeast-southwest trend, over theirArchean tonalitic basement in the parautochthonous Gagnonterrane. A northeast to southwest increase in metamorphicgrade from greenschist facies north of the Grenville Front to
upper amphibolite - lower granulite facies to the south led tosignificant ore benefitiation with coarsening of hematite andmagnetite grain size and production of magnetite through thebreakdown of Fe carbonates at the contact with silicates(Clarke, 1977; Klein, 1978; Gross, 1996 p. 62-67). Hightemperature-pressure metamorphism took place at around985 Ma, but an early metamorphic event of unknown condi-tions also occurred at 1740 to 1720 Ma (Jordan et al., 2006).Refolded Fe formations reach several hundreds of metres instructural thickness (Roach and Duffel, 1974). Fe oxidestend to concentrate in fold hinges and the deposits reach hun-dreds of million tons with 25 to 45% Fe. The Fe ore is easyto separate from its friable gangue minerals and produces, bygravity or magnetic separation, a high-grade Fe concentrateof 66 to 67% Fe (Gross, 1996; Neal, 2000).
Late Paleoproterozoic and Early MesoproterozoicMineralization
The Makkovikian and Labradorian arc rocks of theMakkovik Province host several U deposits (Kitts-Michelin,Labrador; Gandhi, 1986) and, like the extension of rocks ofsimilar age in the Baltic Shield (Weihed, 2001; Eilu et al.,2003), have been explored extensively (Marshall et al.,2003). Rocks of the Makkovik Province extend in theparautochthon and may also be of interest for exploration,including for IOCG and U deposits. Likewise, at the south-west end of the Grenville Province in Ontario, latePaleoproterozoic granitoid and other rocks in theparautochthon may deserve exploration for similar deposits.
Fe oxide-REE deposits of the St. François Mountains,Missouri (Pea Ridge, Pilot Knob, Bourbon, Camels Hump,Katz Spring, and Iron Mountain; Seeger et al., 2001) areassociated with felsic volcanic rocks and granite (EasternGranite-Rhyolite Province) of early Mesoproterozoic age(e.g. 1473 ± 3 Ma; Van Schmus et al., 1996). Magnetite andhematite are associated with REE minerals (apatite, mon-azite, xenotime, bastnaesite, and britholite) in breccia pipes(Seeger et al., 2001). Renewed volcanic, subvolcanic pluton-ism and hydrothermal activity took place at 1.38 Ga withextrusion of rhyolite ash-flow tuffs and caldera collapse(Menuge et al., 2002). The volcano-plutonic complex thathosts the deposits is coeval with the Pinwarian magmatic arcof the Grenville Province, and deformed and metamor-
FIGURE 6. The open pit of the Mount Wright mine in Quebec. FIGURE 7. Metamorphosed iron formation of the Wabush Formation (pen-cil for scale).
phosed volcanic and granitoid rocks are well documented inboth the parautochthon and allochthon (Central Gneiss Belt)in Ontario, as previously described.
Metallogenic Environments and Districts Specific to theGrenville Province
Metallogenic settings specific to the Grenville Provincehost past-producing mines such as the world-class Balmat-Edwards Zn deposit, the New Calumet and Montauban Zn-Pb-Ag-Au (±Cu) mines, the Long Lake zinc mine, the RenzyLake and Lac Edouard Ni-Cu deposits, the Hilton andMarmoraton Fe mines, the Faraday, Bicroft and other Umines near Bancroft, as well as many, small Fe, Au, Mo, Zn,and U deposits, some of them also formerly mined (deLorraine and Dill, 1982; Jourdain et al., 1990; Eckstrand etal., 1996; Lentz, 1996; Clark, 2000). Most of these occurwithin the supracrustal belts of the orogen. In contrast, thegneiss terranes that dominate the Grenville Province and thatmay comprise the volcano-plutonic arc settings are largelyuntapped in terms of mineral resources (Tollo et al., 2004).In this section, we highlight the known settings insupracrustal belts and then emphasize the importance of thevolcano-plutonic arc components as potential hosts to meta-morphosed, non-traditional, arc-related mineral depositssuch as metamorphosed IOCG, VMS Cu-Au, epithermal Auand porphyry Mo, Cu, or Cu-Au. Subsequent sectionsexplore how fertile crust, produced through arc magmatismand crustal-scale fault zones, can also be critical elements inthe development of post-collisional magmatic Ni-Cu-Co orFe-Ti ores, hydrothermal IOCG, skarns, U, and lode Audeposits (cf. Tornos and Casquet, 2005).
Volcano-Plutonic Belts Prospective for Arc-Related MineralDeposits
At least four metamorphosed volcanogenic massive sul-phide (VMS) deposits are known in accreted arc terranes ofthe Grenville Province (Fig. 2). The New Calumet Zn-Pb-Ag-Au-Cu mine at the northern end of the Bancroft terrane(3.8 Mt at 5.8% Zn, 1.6% Pb, 65 g/t Ag, and 0.4 g/t Au) andthe Au-Ag-Zn-Pb Tétreault deposit in Montauban (2.49 Mtat 6.68% Zn, 2.27% Pb, 1.13 g/t Au, and 131.3 g/t Ag) con-sist of massive sulphide lenses and disseminated sulphidesassociated with cordierite-anthophyllite-bearing gneissesthat are metamorphosed equivalent of hydrothermallyaltered rocks. In addition, amphibolite and felsic rocks in theMontauban area preserve volcanic textures (Bernier et al.,1987 and references therein; Villeneuve, 1988; Williams,1992; Bernier and MacLean, 1993; Nadeau et al., 1999;Gauthier et al., 2004b). At the Dussault showing, semimas-sive Zn-Pb-Cu-Ag-Au mineralization is hosted by horn-blende- and diopside-bearing calc-silicate rock associatedwith orthopyroxene-bearing amphibolite, garnet-bearingquartzofeldspathic gneiss, biotite quartzofeldspathic gneiss,aluminous gneiss (with garnet, sillimanite, and cordierite),pyrite- and cordierite-bearing quartzite, gedrite-orthopyrox-ene gneiss, and phlogopite-sapphirine-corundum and gah-nite-bearing schists. According to Bernier (1993), theselithologic assemblages are the upper amphibolite- to lowergranulite-facies equivalents of volcanogenic sulphides andalteration pipes, and alteration zones associated with maficand felsic volcanism. The fourth occurrence is the Boudrias
showing among supracrustal rocks of the GrandeBergeronne area, southeast of Baie Comeau. The locationsof smaller showings of this type in the Ontario CentralMetasedimentary Belt are given by Easton and Fyon (1992,Fig. 24.9a).
Upper amphibolite- and granulite-facies arc settings pre-senting alteration assemblages typical of IOCG, Cu-AuVMS, or epithermal Au deposits have also been identified inthe 1.4 Ga Bondy Gneiss Complex, the 1.5 Ga La RomaineSupracrustal Belt, and the Bancroft terrane (Figs. 1, 3, 8;Blein et al., 2004; Corriveau and Bonnet, 2005; Peck andSmith, 2005). These and the 1.64 Ga felsic volcaniclastic (?)rocks of the Pitts Harbour Group with multi-element Cu-Au,Ag-As-Mo lake sediment anomalies (Fig. 2; Gower et al.,1995) are considered prospective exploration targets.
The 1.4 to 1.35 Ga arc-related Bondy Gneiss Complexhosts a volcanic-hosted hydrothermal system at granulitefacies (Blein et al., 2003, 2004; Fu et al., 2003; Boggs andCorriveau, 2004; Wodicka et al., 2004). High-Mg cordierite-orthopyroxene white gneiss, garnet-biotite-sillimanite gneisslocally with preserved lapilli textures, and orthopyroxene-magnetite-rich gneiss anomalous in Au occur next to welllaminated K-enriched felsic gneiss and layered amphibolite.Together these units signal paleo-chlorite, argillic and potas-sic alteration zones within a felsic volcanic dome with inter-spersed mafic volcanic (lavas/sills?) rocks. These alterationfacies grade into others interpreted as metamorphosed Ca-leached argillic, advanced argillic, potassic to sericitic alter-ation zones and finally calcic alteration zones with Cu min-eralization. Tourmalinite, a few kilometres north of the mainalteration zones, indicates the presence of meta-exhalite dis-tal to the main system. Dissemination, network and layers(veins?) of magnetite concordant with the gneissosity occurover an area of 9 by 6 km irrespective of the rock types pres-ent and are interpreted to record a pervasive Fe oxide alter-ation superimposed on the carbonate, argillic and chloritiza-tion alteration zones prior to metamorphism. The magnetite-rich units together with garnetite and calc-silicate rocks formthe main hosts to Cu mineralization, whereas anomalous Auvalues were found in sillimanite-rich gneiss typical of meta-morphosed high-sulphidation zones. The alteration zonesshare many hallmarks with those associated with AustralianProterozoic Cu-Au volcanogenic massive sulphide deposits(Large et al., 2001). Cu-Au mineralization in the BondyGneiss Complex is associated with HREE, Zr, and Hfenrichments and pervasive birdwing-shaped REE profileswhose distribution is decoupled from major element varia-tions and signatures. The trace element behaviour impliesrock interaction with reducing hydrothermal solutionsenriched in ionic complexes, and large amounts of fluorine-rich fluids and suggests, with the influx of Fe oxide,polyphase hydrothermal activity not unlike what is observedin many IOCG deposits (Corriveau, 2007).
The amphibolite- to granulite-facies La RomaineSupracrustal Belt and a southeastern volcano-sedimentaryextension of the Wakeham Group that reaches MusquaroLake in eastern Quebec represent two fertile, 1.5 Ga vol-cano-sedimentary intra-arc basins of the continental mag-matic arc of the Pinware terrane with hydrothermally alteredand Cu mineralized felsic volcanic centres and subvolcanicbatholiths (Fig. 8; Bonnet et al., 2005; Corriveau and
L. Corriveau, S. Perreault, and A. Davidson
832
Prospective Metallogenic Settings of the Grenville Province
833
Bonnet, 2005). The volcanic centres host coarse 1.50 Ga rhy-olitic to dacitic pyroclastic rocks (Fig. 3) locally intruded by1.49 Ga quartz-feldspar porphyry or associated with a com-posite amphibolite unit (lava and/or sill), mineralized in Cu,as well as with nodular quartzofeldspathic gneiss, aluminousgneiss, garnetite, ironstone, carbonate-rich rock, and calc-silicate rock. The latter units display distributions, paragene-ses, and modes diagnostic of metamorphosed exhalites andhydrothermal alteration zones (e.g. sericitic, argillic,advanced argillic, carbonate, and Fe oxide alterations). Thepreservation of lapilli demonstrates that precursors were atleast in part volcanic in origin whereas abrupt changes inunit thickness and distribution of hydrothermal alterationand mineralization signal the presence of potential synvol-canic faults (Fig. 8). Sporadic mafic lapilli and magma min-gling structure point to coeval mafic and felsic magmatism,whereas the volcanic textures and the presence of acid alter-ation point to vesicular volcanism and hydrothermal activityin a subaerial to shallow marine environment.
The recognition of volcanic textures and metamorphosedhydrothermal alteration is a vindication of mapping strate-gies developed to explore for volcanic-hosted oxide or sul-phide deposits and epithermal deposits in frontier gneiss ter-ranes (Bonnet and Corriveau, 2007). The results illustrateagain that units resembling metasedimentary rocks, in par-ticular metapelite, may be first-order targets for the search ofmetamorphosed hydrothermal deposits in gneiss terranes(Bonnet and Corriveau, 2007). This premise is not new:Gauthier et al. (1985) noted that sillimanite-rich units were akey mineral indicator for gold exploration, and Allard andCarpenter (1988) provided a list of minerals whose unusualabundance and paragenesis formed a promising explorationtool in metamorphosed terranes. Nevertheless, from projectimplementation to field interpretation, these tools are rarelyapplied. In this light, four other occurrences of unusual alu-minous gneiss in Newfoundland and Quebec are of interest.
Sodic sapphirine-bearing gneiss in the Indian Head Rangeinlier of Newfoundland (Fig. 1) signals widespread premeta-
Ca-Fe-Mn alteration(precursor: maficlavas or gabbros)
Si-Al-K alteration(precursor: felsic tuff)
5 cm Al nodules
Al vein
Mineralization
6 cm
sulphides
HB
Grt - Cpx AMP
AMP
Opx
5 cm
FIGURE 8. Metamorphosed hydrothermal alteration zones within and adjacent to a felsic volcanic centre in the La Romaine Supracrustal Belt of Quebec(Bonnet et al., 2005). All units are steeply dipping. Photos: mineralization - disseminated sulphide, including chalcopyrite, in amphibolite from the compos-ite mafic unit; Ca-Fe-Mn alteration (precursor: mafic lavas or gabbros) - enclave of garnet- and clinopyroxene-bearing (Grt, Cpx) mafic layered gneiss in anamphibolite of the composite amphibolite units; Si-Al-K alteration (precursor: felsic tuff) - series of boudinaged aluminous veins in a pink quartzofeldspathicgneiss; leaching zone (precursor: felsic lapillistone) - hydrothermally-altered lapillistone metamorphosed to a garnet - biotite- sillimanite gneiss with fine-grained homogeneous quartzofeldspathic fragments of similar size and shape to the deformed equivalent lapillistone of Figure 3A; silicification (precursor:intermediate volcanic rocks) - quartz-rich gneiss with cordierite (see Bonnet et al., 2005 for detailed description).
morphic albitization of “sediments” and occurs with gar-netiferous gneiss and dioritic gneiss locally rich in magnetite(Owen et al., 2003). This regional albitization is of unknownorigin but offers a target for (IOCG?) exploration. To thenorth, cordierite-, gedrite-, and sapphirine-bearing gneissesin the Long Range inlier display anomalous enrichment inMg and Al and are impoverished in Ca. These features aretypical of metamorphosed chlorite alteration zones, althoughother precursors are possible (Owen and Greenough, 1995;Owen et al., 2003). Nodular sillimanite gneiss and siliceousgneiss typical of metamorphosed sericitic to advancedargillic alteration zones also outcrop within quartzofeld-pathic gneiss of uncertain origin and supracrustal rocks inthe Baie de Brador area near Blanc Sablon (Figs. 1, 9). Thenodules form disseminations or trains that mimic boudi-naged aluminous veins (Fig. 9A-C) and are found adjacent toa siliceous gneiss (Fig. 9D). These rocks can be traced forover 10 km. North of the Brador Fault, the nodular andsiliceous gneisses are bounded by graphitic aluminous (gar-net+silimanite±cordierite) gneiss, containing discrete,deformed pyritiferous quartz veins, and a layer of whitequartzite, with biotite-garnet lenses (coticule ?), locally withgarnet-bearing amphibolite. These features share many char-acteristics of the sericitic and argillic alteration zones of theLa Romaine Supracrustal Belt and Musquaro Lake area of
t h eWakeham Group as well as those of the IOCG LyonMountain setting in the Adirondack Highlands (discussedbelow) (Figs. 1, 8). This interpretation differs significantlyfrom the original diatexitic model in Perreault and Heaman(2003) and builds on the new knowledge acquired by identi-fying metamorphosed hydrothermal settings as a means tosuggest new territories for mineral exploration (Bonnet andCorriveau, 2007. Finally, arkose units with sillimanite-quartznodules have also been reported west of Musquaro Lake inthe Wakeham Group, some of which crop out in the vicinityof magnetite and molybdenite occurrences (Sharma, 1973;map unit 1). These units have not been revisited since thelate 1970s, but descriptions bear striking similarities to thoseof pyroclastic units at Musquaro Lake and their sericiticalteration.
Supracrustal Belts: Host to Sedimentary Exhaltive and IronOxide Copper-Gold Base Metal Deposits
Mesoproterozoic metasedimentary belts of the GrenvilleOrogen contain the marble-hosted Zn Balmat-Edwards-Pierrepont mining district of the Adirondack Lowlands (Fig.2) and the Franklin Furnace-Sterling Hill district in NewJersey. Both have inspired mineral exploration for decades(Sangster et al., 1992). Massive Zn sulphide orebodies were
L. Corriveau, S. Perreault, and A. Davidson
834
FIGURE 9. Sillimanite rich nodules in quartzofeldspathic gneiss next to a quartz-rich gneiss. (A) Veins and disseminated nodules interpreted as zones of argilicor sericitic alteration; (B, C) Trains of nodules interpreted as boudinaged veins; (D) Quartz-rich gneiss interpretred as a metamorphosed silicification zone.
B C D
A
Prospective Metallogenic Settings of the Grenville Province
835
formed about 1.3 Ga ago in a sequence of evaporate-bearingsiliceous and dolomitic marble of the Grenville Supergroupand subsequently metamorphosed to upper amphibolitefacies and polydeformed. Both districts have been recentlyreclassified as potential McArthur-type SEDEX depositsknown to be emplaced within a carbonate evaporitic plat-form that also contains hematitic clastic sediments (seeGauthier and Chartrand, 2005). Such settings may be alsoprospective for Broken Hill-type, IOCG and Carlin-typelode gold deposits.
The Balmat orebodies occur within an overturned isoclineinto which anhydrite of evaporitic provenance flowed. Thelarge ductility contrasts between anhydrite and calc-silicateunits led to the development of axial planar macrofracturesthat evolved into tectonic slides (de Lorraine and Dill, 1982;de Lorraine, 2001, pers. comm., 2005). Conformable mas-sive sphalerite-pyrite-quartz lenses and layers containedwithin three stratigraphic units probably served as the locifor development of some of the minor or parasitic folds andthe tectonic slides associated with the main syncline.Sphalerite was extremely mobile during peak metamorphism(650-700ºC and 6.5 kb) and locally flowed from the massivesulphide “parent” bodies into thin but extensive, crosscutting“macrofractures” at points where macrofractures happenedto transect the parent bodies. Spectacular excursions orremobilizations of “daughter” ore into macrofracturesoccurred locally with sulphide apparently flowing radiallyoutward as far as 2 km away from source bed or parent oremasses. The bulk of remobilized sulphides remained within0.5 to 1 km from the parent orebodies. Such spectacular oreremobilization may have framed current perception thatmetamorphosed orebodies are remobilized significantly,however, this is not the norm as exemplified by well pre-served stratigraphy even in marble successions (Gauthier etal., 2004b).
In New Jersey, Grenville Supergroup quartzofeldspathicgneiss, marble, and calc-silicate rock host IOCG and Znoxide deposits, and overlie (structurally?) a calc-alkalinevolcanoplutonic belt inferred to be ca. 1.3 to 1.25 Ga in ageand to belong to a continental magmatic arc (Puffer andVolkert, 1991; Volkert et al., 2000b; Volkert, 2004a). TheEdison magnetite deposits comprise magnetite-quartz layerswith variable concentrations of K-feldspar, biotite, garnet,sillimanite, and apatite and some zones of disseminated sul-phides (magnetite, bornite, ferrian ilmenite, chalcopyrite,covellite, pyrite, and molybdenite). They are associated withpotassic alterations and gneisses recently reinterpreted ashydrothermally altered felsic volcanic and/or pyroclasticrocks (Puffer and Gorring, 2005). The Zn oxide Franklin-Sterling Hill deposits formed through precipitation of zin-cian carbonates, oxides, and silicates from oxidized andH2S-poor brines in a shallow marine basin with evaporites(Volkert et al., 2000b; Johnson and Skinner, 2003). A ca.1.12 Ga rift environment, with volcanic and subvolcanicintrusions, is invoked as the paleo-environment for the vari-ety of ore deposits in the area. The volcano-sedimentarypackage would have been deposited shortly before orcoevally with the emplacement of 1.12 to 1.09 Ga A-typegranitoids along crustal-scale faults (Volkert et al., 2000b;Puffer and Gorring, 2005). If this age is correct, then themetasedimentary rocks in New Jersey are younger than and
cannot belong to the same basin as the >1.27 Ga GrenvilleSupergroup in the Central Metasedimentary Belt.Nevertheless, the paleo-environments may be similar. It is ofinterest to note, however, that they may be coeval with the<1.15 Ga Flinton Group in Ontario, in which small Zn show-ings occur.
In the Central Metasedimentary Belt of Quebec, severalZn sulphide and Zn oxide deposits are associated with meta-morphosed Zn-Mg siderite horizons and stratiform mag-netite-bearing Zn-Mn marble units, respectively (Gauthierand Brown, 1986; Gauthier et al., 2004b; Gauthier andChartrand, 2005). Paleo-environments share many hallmarksof the paleo-basins hosting the Balmat-Edward andFranklin-Sterling Hill deposits and are considered prospec-tive for marble-hosted McArthur-type SEDEX deposits.This mineralization type reflects the presence of hot, oxi-dized saline fluids of evaporitic origin in a paleo-basin(Cooke et al., 2000), a type of fluid and setting that are alsoimportant in IOCG metallogenesis (Marshall and Oliver,2006). The presence of the Hilton and Marmoraton Fe minesin the same general area is of interest in this respect (Fig. 2;Gilbert, 1959; Gross, 1967, 1996). The former Hilton Femine comprises magnetite, hematite, pyrite, and pyrrhotiteore that, with their associated K-feldspar-, amphibole-,and/or magnetite-bearing skarns, veins, pods, or shoots ofmassive magnetite and biotite-rich schists, are closelyrelated to biotite-granite (Wilson, 1926; Deland, 1959;Gross, 1967). These and other features signal a large intru-sion-related hydrothermal system with Fe ore and sodi-cal-cic and potassic alterations of country rock characteristic ofIOCG deposits. The Marmoraton Fe mine, of contact meta-somatic skarn type, formed in marble at the contact of the1.24 Ga Deloro granite stock; it produced over 25 milliontonnes of low-P Fe ore averaging 42.8% Fe between 1955and 1978 (Easton and Fyon, 1992).
Another example of a marble-hosted Zn deposit is thesmall, defunct Long Lake mine in Ontario (Fig. 2; Wolff,1979). Here a marble septum within the 1.15 Ga MountainGrove gabbro (Davidson, 2000) hosted sphalerite-rich orewith minor pyrite, pyrrhotite, chalcopyrite, galena, and mag-netite. In its 22 months of operation, this mine producedapproximately 90 000 tonnes of ore averaging 11.6% Zn(Carter, 1984). The mineralization may have been derivedvia remobilization from low-grade SEDEX deposits at depthalong the projected interface between mafic-felsic volcanicrocks and marble; pyrite-rich deposits at this interface areexposed in the same region and commonly carry tourmaline.The nature and location of other, smaller marble-hosted Zndeposits in the Central Metasedimentary Belt are outlined inEaston and Fyon (1992, Fig. 24-14.)
The arc-related Paleoproterozoic granulite-faciesDisappointment Lake unit in the Wilson Lake terrane ofLabrador bears a very high positive aeromagnetic anomalyassociated with titanhematite- and magnetite-rich felsic andaluminous gneisses and metamorphosed Fe oxide lenses upto ten metres thick, as well as Fe oxide-dominant aluminousveins (Kletetschka and Stout, 1998; Korhonen and Stout,2004). The Fe oxide lenses locally crosscut gneissosity. Themost distinctive unit is described as sapphirine+quartz andorthopyroxene+sillimanite+quartz restitic layers in the
paragneiss. Abundant coarse-grained magnetite coexistingwith titanhematite, exsolved titanhematite in orthopyroxene,exsolved hematite in sillimanite, and high Fe3+ in sillimaniteand corundum, provide a record of high ƒO2 (Korhonen andStout, 2004). This association of felsic, aluminous, and fer-ruginous gneisses has, like many others, been interpreted asconsisting of metasediments and restites (Arima et al., 1986;Thomas et al., 2000), however, a lateritic origin has beenproposed for the aluminous gneiss (Leong and Moore,1972), and a metasomatic origin for crosscutting Fe oxidelenses (Currie and Gittins, 1988). These units bear strikingsimilarities with those resulting from premetamorphichydrothermal sericitic and Fe oxide alterations of volcanicrocks and an alternative is that the area was subjected tosevere Fe oxide and sericitic alterations and that this strongoxidation zone constitutes an exploration target for IOCGdeposits. Documentation that abundant Fe oxides also occurin mafic dykes crosscutting the Fe-rich gneisses point to anoxidizing hydrothermal event either coeval or following theemplacement of mafic dykes and prior to metamorphism at1626 ± 10 Ma (Korhonen and Stout, 2006).
A metasedimentary package, likely Pinwarian in age, theManitou Metamorphic Complex of the St-Jean Domainhosts the Manitou and Bottine showings where sulphide min-eralization was remobilized during Grenvillian metamor-phism and deformation. Two generations of mineralizationare recognized: 1) Cu-Ag and Zn-Cu mineralization associ-ated with biotite-bearing quartzofeldspathic gneiss (Fig. 10)and 2) Cu-Ag mineralization associated with calc-silicaterocks and late deformation (Perry and Raymond, 1996;Clark, 2003). Results of 1.98% Cu over 1.7 m were returnedfor the Cu mineralized zones (Clark, 2003). The second gen-eration of Cu mineralization is associated with calc-silicatelayers, interpreted as metamorphosed alteration zones, andalso forms thin veins of chalcopyrite-bornite-pyrite discor-dant to the gneissosity, suggesting a post-ductile deforma-tion. The origin of the mineralization is interpreted to be of aSEDEX type with later remobilization (Clark, 2003).
Finally, a striking similarity between the CentralMetasedimentary Belt and the Carlin-type gold deposits set-ting of Nevada, including transition from marble-rich toquartzite-rich rock assemblages, tectonic reworking includ-ing thrusting and subsequent extension, and emplacement of
lamprophyre dykes, may be worth considering as a newvenue for exploration (Corriveau and van Breemen, 2000; cf.Yigit and Hofstra, 2003).
Granitoid-Related Iron Oxide Copper-Gold Deposits andAlterations and Prospective Rare Earth Element Settings
Three IOCG districts are currently known in theGrenville: the Manitou district with the Kwyjibo deposit andMarmont prospect in the eastern Grenville; the LyonMountain area in the Adirondack Highlands; and the Mid-Atlantic Fe belt (Friehauf et al., 2002; Clark et al., 2005;Gauthier and Chartrand, 2005; Corriveau, 2007). These dis-tricts encompass a large spectrum of low-Ti magnetite and/orhematite-rich breccias, veins, disseminations, and massivebodies with polymetallic enrichments, especially Cu, Au,Ag, U, and REE. Their deposits and prospects are geneticallyassociated with large-scale, A-type granite plutons, as wellas with sodi-calcic (e.g. Kwyjibo; Clark et al., 2005), potas-sic (Edison mine area, New-Jersey: Puffer and Gorring,2005) and argillic (Lyon Mountain: Selleck et al., 2004)alteration zones. At Lyon Mountain, leaching of country rockand early leucogranite by circulating Na- and Fe-rich mag-matic and surface-derived hydrothermal fluids to form thealteration zones was coeval with granite emplacementbetween approximately 1045 and 1030 Ma (McLelland etal., 2002; Selleck et al., 2004). Post-orogenic, 1.00 to 0.96 Ga, A-type granites and related pegmatites of theHudson and New Jersey Highlands are proximal to majorfault zones and associated with magnetite-U-REE mineral-ization (e.g. Vassiliou and Puffer, 1985; Volkert et al., 2000a;Volkert, 2004b). This age interval also corresponds toemplacement of the post-orogenic granitoid hosting theKwyjibo deposit, a replacive, Cloncurry-type IOCG depositin the eastern Grenville Province. In this deposit, the mainpolymetallic stage comprises chalcopyrite, pyrite, fluorite,molybdenite, and REE-bearing minerals in hydrothermalveins and stockworks. A titanite age of 975 Ma has beenobtained from a mineralized sample. The main ore-formingstage is superimposed on pre-existing (pre-1030 Ma), locallyfolded, massive, layered or brecciated tabular bodies orstockworks of magnetite ironstone replacing an 1175 ± 4 Maleucogranite along its fabric. The geodynamic setting isinferred to be an early ca. 1.5 Ga magmatic arc with renewedgranitic magmatism at 1.1 and 1.0 Ga, in a successor back-arc extensional setting with major fault zones (Gobeil et al.,2003; Wodicka et al., 2003).
Rare earth element-bearing Fe skarn is also associatedwith the peralkaline granite Deloro pluton in the CompositeArc Belt in Ontario (Easton, 1989), and calcic metasomaticfronts and veins in the syenite carapace of the potassic alka-line plutons of the Kensington-Skootamatta suite (Fig. 1;Corriveau, 1989) display similar habit and mineral assem-blages to those of the REE prospects in the syenite carapaceof the Eden Lake carbonatite complex in Manitoba (Muminand Corriveau, 2004). Also of interest with regards to thepotential of the Grenville Province are the 1.03 Ga Kipawanepheline syenite for its REE anomalies (van Breemen andCurrie, 2004); two other occurrences of similar nephelinesyenite are known in the Ontario parautochthon.
L. Corriveau, S. Perreault, and A. Davidson
836
FIGURE 10. Non-descript biotite quartzofeldspathic gneiss host to the Cu-Ag and Zn-Ag mineralization of the Manitou showing. The quartzofelds-pathic gneiss is cut by late granitic pegmatite.
Prospective Metallogenic Settings of the Grenville Province
837
Dep
osit
nam
eT
ype*
Mai
n or
e as
sem
blag
eSi
ze in
km
le
ngth
/wid
th/d
epth
Res
ourc
es(t
ons)
Ton
nage
min
edG
rade
FeG
rade
TiO
2
Gra
deP 2
O5
Gra
deV
2O5
Gra
deC
rPe
riod
of m
inin
g
Mor
in A
north
osite
95–8 59 1 ,81– 2191%32.3 3
%05.24000 25
tM 61 .0
650 / 81 0.0 / 822.0etine
mlI nairreF2
yrvI94–219 1
%11% 08.04
008 01t
M 5e tine
mlI ,et itengaM-iT
3eg
rosb
ois
D%02
% 72t
M 01etine
m lI ,etitengaM- iT
3et yloppy
H-t niaS
84 –9391 ,11–0191%93
%6 3000 0 11
tM 17.6
30.0 / 4 2.0)t
R ( eti nemlI nairreF
2tse
W dna tsaE ebmol uo
C57–1781
%72%6 2
tM 2
060. 0 / 021 .0etine
ml I nairre F2
ecanruF8191
%02. 92%0 3. 72
00 0 31t
M 5 .640. 0 /2 0.0 / 2 1.0
) tR( e tine
m lI nairreF2
c irtcelE lareneG
7 791 ,66– 75 91 ,64 –0 49 1%07.4 3
%01. 430 00 7 93
tM 44 .3
60. 0 / 61 .0eti tap
A ,e tinem lI nairre F
4 + 2leng i
B Sain
t-Cha
rles
3Ti
-Mag
netit
e, Il
men
ite, A
patit
e1.
8 / 0
.336
5.4
Mt
29.5
0%10
.10%
9.25
%0.
10%
%02.5%21.5
%57.4 2t
M 3 .02etine
m lI ,etitapA ,e ti tenga
M-iT2
tsE-ehcaH aL
%76.0%91
%94t
M 5 .3e tine
m lI + e ti ten gaM-i T
3pu cr ettu
B Labr
ievi
lle A
north
osite
Lac
Brû
lé2
Ferr
ian
Ilmen
ite0.
120
/ 0.0
03–0
.012
**5.
8 M
t42
%35
%Pa
mbr
um A
north
osite
%11%74
tM 94
etin em lI ,eti ten ga
M -iT3
mu rbmaP ca L
1.13
/ 0.
04–0
.105
/ 0.
05%01.02
%8 450.0 / 80.0 / 4.2 0.
365
/ 0.0
9%05. 4
%5 4n
won kn u52. 0 / 4
e titapA ,)
%5 1–0 1( et inemlI
1uei
miss iD caL La
c Ti
o2
Ferr
ian
Ilmen
ite1.
09 /
1.04
/ 0.
11
>125
Mt(
1,2)
…–059 1%0 6. 33
%0 8.83t
M 0 9>Ev
eret
t3
Ti-M
agne
tite,
Ilm
enite
, Apa
tite
3 / 0
.329
4 M
t16
.20%
9.75
%4%
Mag
pie
(1, 2
, 3 e
t 4)
3Ti
-Mag
netit
e, Il
men
ite3.
66 /
0.42
5 / 0
.281
0 M
t43
.10%
10.6
0%0.
2% V
1.55
%
Can
ton
Arn
aud
4A
patit
e, Il
men
ite, T
i-Mag
netit
e2
/ 0.1
7510
7 M
t (1)
8.41
%6.
20%
Sain
t-Urb
ain
Anor
thos
ite
Lac
Four
nier
Ano
rthos
ite
Sept
-Île
s lay
ered
com
plex
Lac
La B
lach
e An
orth
osite
(2) P
rove
n an
d in
ferr
ed re
serv
es fr
om 1
950.
Cur
rent
reso
urce
s and
rese
rves
are
kep
t con
fiden
tial b
y Q
IT. *
See
text
for m
iner
aliz
atio
n ty
pe su
bdiv
isio
n; *
* m
ore
than
one
lens
.
Lac
Sain
t-Jea
n An
orth
osite
Hav
re-S
aint
-Pie
rre
Anor
thos
ite
(1) E
stim
ated
rese
rves
are
bas
ed o
n in
ferr
ed re
sour
ces e
xcep
t for
the
Tio
Min
e an
d C
anto
n A
rnau
d, b
ased
on
prov
en a
nd in
ferr
ed re
serv
es.
Her
vieu
x Ea
st,
Her
vieu
x W
est,
Schm
oot
M 7.17etine
ml I ,e titengaM-iT
2
(3) R
t, ru
tile.
TA
BL
E1.
Fe-
Ti
depo
sits
in
the
Gre
nvil
le P
rovi
nce
of Q
uebe
c.
Magmatic and Remobilized Ni-Cu Sulphide and PlatinumGroup Element Deposits
Currently known Cu-Ni deposits (Renzy and Edouardmines, McNickel showing) are largely of low grade (<1% Niand <1% Cu), richer ones, such as the Lac Volant prospect,are limited in size, and the most significative PGE mineral-ization known is associated with the 2.49 to 2.44 Ga maficintrusions that extends from the Southern to the Grenvilleprovinces in Ontario (Wilson, 1993; Clark, 2000, 2001a;Thériault et al., 2003; Vaillancourt et al., 2003).
Cu-Ni (±Co±PGE) sulphides associated with mafic toultramafic and anorthosite intrusions occur as disseminationto massive lenses with magmatic textures and net veinswithin mafic-ultramafic rocks at, or close to, contact withsupracrustal country rocks (type 1 in Fig. 2). Examplesinclude the Renzy and Lac Edouard mines, the Lac Paradisprospect, and mineralization associated with the Intrusion duRéservoir (Table 1, Fig. 2). Cu-Ni showings in the MountainGrove gabbro intrusion in Ontario (Wolff, 1979) are also ofthis type. Magmatic Cu-Ni mineralization is also associatedwith mafic sills or feeder dykes such as the Lac Volantprospect in the Matamec complex (Fig. 2). This type is con-sidered the most promising. Finally, examples of magmaticCu-Ni sulphides associated with pyroxenite or melanogab-bro emplaced near the margin of anorthosite massifs includeNotre-Dame-de-la Merci in the Morin anorthosite, McNickeland Chûtes-des-Passes in the Lac-Saint-Jean anorthosite, avariety of showings in the Lac-de-la-Blache, Lac Tortue, andNorthwest Massif of the Havre-Saint-Pierre anorthosites,and the B-20 showing in the Rivière-Pentecôte anorthosite(e.g. Chevé et al., 1999; Gobeil et al., 1999).
Magmatic hydrothermal PGE-dominant (±Cu±Ni)deposits are associated with mafic to ultramafic intrusions(type 2 in Fig. 2; Wilson, 1993; Jobin-Bevans, 2002;Thériault et al., 2003). PGE minerals and sulphides are usu-ally disseminated in the ultramafic facies of these intrusionsalthough lenses of semimassive sulphides and breccia zonesmay also be present. Examples include the Lac-Nadeau andLac Mitaine showings (Fig. 2).
A third type consists of remobilized magmatic Cu-Ni sul-phides and epigenetic Cu-Ni mineralization (type 3 in Fig.2). Magmatic Cu-Ni sulphides are remobilized during high-grade metamorphism and concentrated in sulphide-richveins or lenses along the gneissosity. Epigenitic Cu-Ni sul-phides occur in veins along ductile or brittle shear zones andare found in metamorphosed mafic-ultramafic intrusions andadjacent supracrustal rocks. Examples include the B30showing north of Baie-Comeau, the 2EZ showing in theHart-Jaune terrane, the Lobster Bay showing in the Pinwareterrane, and a gossan zone in the Saint-Augustin Complex.The latter is composed of Fe hydroxide, hematite with pyrite,pyrrhotite, minor chalcopyrite, and pentlandite. Fresh miner-alized samples are composed of massive pyrrhotite andpyrite with minor chalcopyrite and pentlandite. This show-ing is an example of magmatic sulphides emplaced at a con-tact and remobilized by tectono-metamorphic processes.
Some of the magmatic Ni-Cu mineralization is associatedwith mafic intrusions characterized by steeply dipping layer-ing and foliation. In some cases, layering was transposed andfoliation formed tectonically (e.g. Musquaro intrusion;
Corriveau et al., 2002), in others vertical layering and min-eral foliation is primary (e.g. the vertically layered Montjoieintrusion; Corriveau and van Breemen, 2000). Steep igneouslayering in mafic layered intrusions is most common alongmarginal border zones of classical layered intrusions (Irvineet al., 1998) and is attributed to sidewall crystallization or tosinking due to tectonism (e.g. Loney and Himmelberg,1983). It also occurs in collapsed mafic-silicic layered intru-sions (MASLI; Wiebe and Collins, 1998) and in syntectonicsheet-like intrusions (Corriveau and van Breemen, 2000). Asvertically layered or foliated mafic intrusions may bear trapsfor magmatic sulphides (e.g. mineralized ultramafic brecciain the Grand-Remous syntectonic mafic sheet intrusion) thatare distinct from those associated with classical, horizontallylayered intrusions (Clark, 2000), discussing potential style ofemplacement provides a mean to better anchor exploration.
Two emplacement models are currently put forward forthe Lac Volant massive sulphide prospect: emplacement as agently inclined feeder dyke subsequently transposed tecton-ically or emplacement of a vertical feeder dyke after collapseof the early stage mafic and silicic layers of a host MASLIintrusion. The subvertical dyke that hosts the Lac Volant Ni-Cu prospect intrudes the Matamec mafic-felsic complexalong a subvertical internal contact of the intrusion (Perryand Roy, 1997). Intrusive sheets, magmatic and solid-statefoliation, and intraplutonic shear zones of the complexdefine a steeply dipping synform dissected by some majorthrust faults (Chevé et al., 1999; Gobeil et al., 1999). Theseauthors interpret the synform as a result of folding afteremplacement of the Lac Volant dyke. Unfolding the intru-sion implies that the Lac Volant dyke was originally mildlyinclined (Clark, 2003; Nabil et al., 2004). An alternativeinterpretation is that the dyke is a late-stage mafic dykeemplaced vertically along the western flank of the Matamecintrusion. The internal verticality of the complex would haveresulted from infolding during the collapse of the mafic-sili-cic layered intrusion (Saint-Germain and Corriveau, 2003)following the model of Wiebe and Collins (1998). This inter-pretation is based on the field evidence that the mafic andfelsic intrusive sheets were formerly horizontal based onsedimentary-like magmatic structures observed between theheavier mafic and lighter felsic magmatic sheets. Inferredpolarities are consistent with infolding of the MatamecComplex. The dyke could have served as a feeder to late-stage, overlying magma chambers and may reflect processesthat may have taken place during the build-up of the intru-sion itself.
Ni-Cu mineralization, such as the one of the GrandRemous ultramafic breccia, can be associated with syntec-tonic mafic intrusions. Such intrusions can take the aspect ofgneissic, hence metamorphic, and tectonically transposedintrusions as emplacement is commonly accompanied by themingling of mafic and felsic magmas, crystal sorting,repeated injections of magmas, formation of striking mag-matic foliation and layering, or recrystallization of the earlyformed crystals whereas residual magmas were percolatingto form veins along adjacent shear zones (Corriveau and vanBreemen, 2000). Vertically layered intrusions displayingsystematic subvertical modal layering, igneous foliation,erosional troughs and surfaces, contact-parallel, crude, con-centric, subvertical layering are distinct from tilted or folded
L. Corriveau, S. Perreault, and A. Davidson
838
Prospective Metallogenic Settings of the Grenville Province
839
classically layered intrusions in which layering was origi-nally mostly horizontal. Tilting cannot be responsible forsystematic subvertical layering of circular stocks, especiallynot for cylindrical igneous foliation pattern. In such cases,verticality of layering is primary, and likely a result of side-wall crystallization in a subvertical magma conduit.Magmatic sulphides, if present, are likely to gravitationallysink to the bottom of the intrusion. Whether magmatic sul-phides would collect and remain preserved in mafic-silicic-layered intrusions, syntectonic sheet intrusions, and verti-cally layered mafic intrusions is uncertain but knowledgethat a targeted intrusion is not a classical horizontally layeredintrusion may bear implications on the exploration strategiesto be adopted.
Magmatic Fe-Ti-(P-V) Deposits Associated withAnorthositic Suites and Mafic Intrusions
Ilmenite (FeTiO3) and rutile (TiO2) ores are mined world-wide from mafic and anorthositic plutonic suites, placerdeposits, and high temperature and pressure metamorphicrocks (Stanaway, 2003). In the Grenville Province, titanifer-ous magnetite, magnetite-ilmenite-apatite, and massive fer-rian ilmenite deposits have been known since the mid-1850sbut only the massive ilmenite Tio deposit in the Havre-Saint-Pierre anorthosite massif is currently mined (Fig. 2; Rose,1969; Gross, 1996; Perreault and Hébert, 2003). The ore iscomposed of a dense coarse-grained aggregate of ferrianilmenite. In general, the deposits occur within tabular intru-sions, stocks, sills, or dykes in anorthosite massifs. Locally,they consist of stratiform accumulations in layered segmentsof anorthosite massifs or in layered mafic intrusions. Fivedistinct styles of mineralization are recognized:1. Magmatic disseminated Fe-Ti oxides (titaniferous mag-
netite+ilmenite) in the host anorthosite or mafic intru-sions (e.g. Raudot Complex, Fig. 5).
2. Massive ferrian ilmenite or massive titaniferous mag-netite layers, dykes, tabular or irregular bodies locallyassociated with oxide-rich norite, jotunite or oxide-apatite gabbronorite and in sharp or diffuse contactswith the host anorthosite. In two cases (St-Urbain andHavre-Saint-Pierre anorthositic suites), rutile is presentin significant amounts in the ferrian ilmenite ore.Massive titaniferous ores are usually associated withlabradorite-bearing anorthosite and massive ferrianilmenite ores with andesine-bearing anorthosite.According to available data, ferrian ilmenite mineraliza-tion occurs only in anorthositic plutons younger than1160 Ma in the Grenville Province (Hébert et al., 2005).
3. Layers and lenses of nelsonite (magnetite-ilmenite-apatite rich rock), interlayered with magnetitite in lay-ered mafic complexes (e.g. Eocambrian Sept-ÎlesLayered Complex (Fig. 5; Cimon and McCann, 2000) orwith oxide-apatite gabbronorite, oxide-rich norite (jotu-nite) or ilmenitite in anorthositic complexes.
4. Late injections of magnetitite, ilmenitite, or oxide-richnorite in an already cooled and solidified anorthosite(see Gross, 1996).
5. Magnetite concentration in late monzonite or mangeritedykes cutting anorthosite. Due to their small size, thistype has no economic potential.
An overview of the main deposits with tonnage and gradevalue is presented in Table 1. Among the other knowndeposits in the area, the most promising ones are the Grader(which was mined in 1950 for a short period), Springer, andLac-au-Vent. All these deposits and smaller showings arecomposed of massive ilmenite dykes emplaced in the ande-sine-bearing anorthosite. One exception is the Big Islanddeposit composed of a rutile and sapphirine-bearing massiveferrian ilmenite dyke with fragments of oxide-rich norite andanorthosite. Rutile can be as high as 15 modal per cent.
Skarns- and Pegmatite-Related Mineralization
Molybdenite deposits are common in the CentralMetasedimentary Belt and are hosted in pegmatite-relatedskarns (Halo, Hunt, Spain, and Zenith deposits), skarnoidrocks (Liedke, Kirkham, and Bain deposits), apatite-calcitevein and dykes (Kirkham, Que.), and 1.05 Ga pegmatite-aplite bodies (Moss deposit) (D. Lentz, per comm., 2004).Pegmatites intruded the Grenville Supergroup after peakmetamorphism or, for the Moss deposit, an A-type syeniteintrusion that may mark the late stages of the Kensington-Skootamatta potassic alkaline suite (Lentz and Creaser,2005). Mineralization occurs as dissemination in the quartz-rich part of the pegmatites.
Skarn-type Cu-Ag±W±Au mineralization occurs amongcalc-silicate rocks associated with calcitic/dolomitic marbleand paragneiss, and felsic intrusions (e.g. Nantel, 2003). Cusulphides (bornite, chalcocite, chalcopyrite, digenite) andassociated Fe sulphides (pyrrhotite and pyrite) are dissemi-nated along veinlets or in centimetre-size pockets (Ortega,2003; Nantel et al., 2004). Sulphide contents rarely exceed10% with Cu grade rarely exceeding 1% and Ag values up to5 ppm (Nantel et al., 2004). Mineralization initially formedthrough intrusion-related fluid circulation in the supracrustalhosts is, in most cases, remobilized by tectonometamorphicprocesses. In some cases, mineralization is metamor-phogenic with no clear relation to felsic plutonism.
Uranium Mineralization
The Grenville Province is a past producer of U with theFaraday, Bicroft, Canadian Dyno, and Greyhawk mines inthe Bancroft terrane of the Central Metasedimentary Belt(Fig. 2). U mineralization occurs in zoned and unzoned peg-matite veins, sulphide-rich siliceous marble, calc-silicateskarn, and calcite and pyroxene veins (Sangster et al., 2006).U and Th mineralization (uraninite, uranothorite, and Th-REE silicates) is also common in metasediment-hosted late-stage pegmatoid veins among migmatites in the CentralMetasedimentary Belt of Quebec and in pegmatite associatedwith late-stage granite that intrudes the Wakeham Group andadjacent gneissic terranes such as those of the Lac Turgeongranite (Baldwin, 1970; Hauseux, 1977; Gauthier et al.,2004b). Other types include 1) local concentrations of Uoxides (that may contain up to 15 wt.% ThO2) associatedwith magnetite in confined layers of quartzofeldspathicgneiss (meta-arkose?) (Baldwin, 1970; Hébert, 1995); 2)pyrochlore and other REE-bearing minerals in carbonatiteand alkaline complexes such as the Quinville and Cantleycarbonatites (Hébert, 1995); U-thorite in pyroxenite in theexocontact of the Kipawa peralkaline intrusion; 3) Fe oxideCu-REE-U mineralization such as the Kwyjibo deposit
(Clark, 2003; Gauthier et al., 2004a, Magrina et al., 2006);and 4) late secondary remobilization along fractures. Thoughthe potential for conglomerate-type (e.g. Elliot Lake) orsandstone-hosted hydrothermal U deposits (AthabascaBasin) exists in parts of the Grenville Province that have onlyseen lower greenschist-facies metamorphism (e.g. theWakeham Group), most of the exploration is oriented at theRössing-type of U mineralization associated with felsicintrusives in supracrustal rocks. The recent recognition of U-bearing IOCG mineralization and metallogenic environmentsin the Grenville Province opens new prospects for U explo-ration in this orogen and current research is targeting meta-morphosed settings as new frontiers (Cuney and Kish, 2004).
Knowledge Gaps
Synthesis of mineral deposits and districts across Canadain this volume underscore the barren nature of the high-grademetamorphic terranes of the Grenville Province in terms oflarge mining camps. A few active mines in several millionsquare kilometres raises serious questions such as (1) havewe applied the appropriate metallogenic models during pastexploration, (2) were the targeted environments appropri-ately known prior to exploration, and (3) was enough moneyspent to search efficiently for mineral deposits and over along enough period to find them?
Effective mineral exploration is anchored on modern geo-science knowledge and guided with the most appropriatemetallogenic models and exploration strategies. But in fron-tier terranes, it all starts with fieldwork; if one does not prop-erly assess the nature of the gneiss it is targeting, explorationhas a low chance of success. Worldwide, volcano-plutonicbelts are key targets for the search for base, precious, andstrategic metals. In gneiss terranes, their recognition remainsa challenge as primary volcanic textures become obliteratedor difficult to identify where metamorphism was accompa-nied by significant deformation. Traditional geologicalmarkers, such as alteration zones associated with sulphide oroxide mineralizing hydrothermal (and hydrothermal-mag-matic) systems, change aspects once metamorphosed at highgrade. Being able to recognize hydrothermal alterationszones at an early stage of mapping is essential to future dis-coveries; so is the understanding of the style of magmaemplacement in potentially fertile, nontraditional mafic andmafic-felsic intrusions.
With modern strategies, fieldwork conducted by highlytrained field geologists, and adequate funding, the nature ofgneiss domains currently construed as sterile can bereassessed. A prime example is the discovery of the Cu-NiLac Volant prospect and other Cu-Ni and Cu-Zn showingsduring a regional mapping project in the St.-Jean Domain(Perreault et al., 1997). What was initially a four-unit maparea became a series of maps with intricate settings thatrange from those hosting SEDEX mineralization to thosehosting magmatic Ni-Cu-Co and IOCG mineralization,prospects, and deposits, opening a huge territory to explo-ration (Gobeil et al., 1999). Another example is the reassess-ment of the nature of the former La Romaine Domain duringa Targeted Geoscience Initiative in the eastern GrenvilleProvince. During this project, a 600 km2 area of gneissesinterpreted as a metasedimentary basin was reapparaised asa metamorphosed continental arc plutonic belt with kilome-
tre-scale wide intra-arc, rift-related volcano-sedimentarysuccessions hosting Cu sulphides and Fe oxides mineralizingsystems.
Many geologists involved in mineral exploration seehigh-grade metamorphism and ductile deformation asdestructive events. But without key ore beneficiation ofPaleoproterozoic taconite through grain coarsening, recrys-tallization into purer end-members of higher metallurgicalvalues, and concentration of sulphides in structural traps, theFe ores in Labrador City and Mount Wright might not be themines they are today.
Conclusions
Disparaged as a sterile root of a collisional orogen, thehigh-grade metamorphic terranes of the Grenville Provinceare increasingly recognized as a complex juxtaposition ofAndean-type volcanic and plutonic arc environments, a con-cept that has direct applications for revisiting the explorationprospectivity of the orogen. Archean, Paleoproterozoic, andMesoproterozoic surface and near-surface volcano-plutonicmagmatic arc, intra-arc rift and island-arc settings sharecharacteristics of VMS, IOCG, epithermal Au, porphyry Cu,and orogenic Au environments. The back-arc settings, theplatformal sedimentary basins, and the within-plate orogenicto late- or post-orogenic mafic and felsic intrusions providetargets for Carlin-type and SEDEX deposits, magmatic Ni-Cu-Co sulphides, PGE, Fe-Ti, Fe-Ti-V-P, and rare metals.However, many 1.7 to 1.6 Ga Labradorian, 1.5 GaPinwarian, and 1.3 to 1.2 Ga Elzevirian arc components maystill remain unidentified among the large tracts of undiffer-entiated gneiss complexes. Magmatic Ni-Cu-PGE targets arealso expected in some of the uncharted terranes and signifi-cant traps for magmatic sulphides may still be discovered inorogenic and late-orogenic mafic and anorthositic intrusions.
Exploration targets are already available in settings simi-lar to those hosting Broken Hill Pb-Zn, VMS-Cu-Au,Olympic Dam IOCG, and Voisey Bay Ni-Cu deposits but, toresult in ore discoveries, the specificity of gneissic “pink-stone” belts and ore settings in syntectonic intrusions need tobe accounted for. This will, in some cases, require the devel-opment of alternative models to the now classic ones derivedfrom decades of successful exploration in “greenstone” beltsand anorogenic plume- or rift-related magmatic settings. Weargue that deposits may be overlooked in the gneiss terranes;first, significantly less exploration is being conducted andless knowledge acquired than those associated with decadesof extensive exploration in the large mining camps of theArchean greenstone belts; second, when exploration is beingconducted, greenstone belt tools, models, and views areused, these may not be adequate for mineral exploration ofProterozoic gneissic orogens. Will the pinkstone belts of theGrenville Province do in the 21st century what the green-stone belts did in the 20th: significantly sustain rejuvenationand replenishment of Canada’s mineral resources? If so, dowe currently have the knowledge required to make properassessments for the sustainable development of such ter-ranes?
Acknowledegments
The authors wish to thank colleagues and Friends of theGrenville, in particular T. Clark, S. Cadéron, W. de Lorraine,
L. Corriveau, S. Perreault, and A. Davidson
840
Prospective Metallogenic Settings of the Grenville Province
841
R.M. Easton, C.F. Gower, and J. Stout for sharing public-domain information and personal knowledge of theGrenville Province, as well as Wayne Goodfellow and JohnLydon, Geological Survey of Canada, Mineral Synthesisproject leader and co-leader. W. de Lorraine kindly providedtext for the Balmat-Edwards deposit and M. Cuney revisedthe uranium section. The manuscript greatly benefited fromthe constructive and detailed review by R.M. Easton and W.Goodfellow (editor). LC and SP also want to acknowledgeA. Davidson for the thoroughness and extent of his originalreview and for his subsequent input as a co-author.
References
Allard, G.O., 1978, Pétrologie et potentiel économique du prolongement dusillon de roches vertes de Chibougamau dans la Province de Grenville:Ministère des Richesses naturelles, Québec, DPV-604, 46 p.
——— 1979, Prolongement du Complexe du Lac Doré dans la Province deGrenville, à l’est de Chibougamau: Ministère de l’Énergie et desRessources, Québec, DPV-685, 21 p.
Allard, G.O., and Carpenter, R.H., 1988, Mineralogical anomalies in meta-morphosed terrains, a neglected but promising exploration tool:International Conference on the Geochemical Evolution of theContinental Crust, Pocos de Cladas, Brazil, p. 229-236.
Archer, P., Chapdelaine, M., and Huot, F., 2004, Discovery of high-grademetamorphosed volcanogenic massive sulphides in the Coulon belt,James Bay: Québec Exploration 2004, Abstracts of Oral Presentationsand Posters, Québec, p. 73.
Arima, M., Kerrich, R., and Thomas, A., 1986, Sapphirine-bearing parag-neiss from the northern Grenville Province in Labrador, Canada:Protolith composition and metamorphic P-T conditions: Geology, v. 14,p. 844-847.
Baldwin, A.B., 1970, Uranium and thorium occurences on the North Shoreof the Gulf of St.-Lawrence: Canadian Institute of Mining Bulletin, v. 63, p. 699-707.
Bandyayera, D., Rhéaume, P., Cadéron, S., Giguère, E., and Sharma,K.N.M., 2004, Géologie de la région du lac Lagacé (32B/14): Ministèredes Ressources naturelles et de la Faune, Québec, RG-2004-02, 31 p.
Bartholomew, M.J., ed., 1984, The Grenville Event in the Appalachians andRelated Topics: Geological Society of America, Special Paper 194, 287 p.
Bellemare, Y., and Jacob, H.-L., 2004, Chapitre 2: Pierre architecturale etminéraux industriels: Ministère des Ressources naturelles, de la Fauneet des Parcs, Québec, DV 2004-01, p. 59-70.
Berclaz, A., Hébert, R., and Rocheleau, M., 1995, La zone tectonique dufront du Grenville à l’est de Louvicourt, Québec: exhumation de lacroûte archéenne pendant l’orogénie grenvillienne: Canadian Journal ofEarth Sciences, v. 32, p. 1899-1920.
Berman, R., Easton, R.M., and Nadeau, L., 2000, A new metamorphic mapof the Canadian Shield; introduction: The Canadian Mineralogist, v. 38,p. 277-285.
Bernier, L., 1993, Étude métallogénique du gîte polymétallique Dussault,canton de Lapeyrère, Province de Grenville: Ministère de l’Énergie etdes Ressources, Québec, MB 93-53, 161 p.
Bernier, L.R., and MacLean, W.H., 1993, Lithogeochemistry of a metamor-phosed VMS alteration zone at Montauban, Grenville Province:Exploration and Mining Geology, v. 2, p. 367-386.
Bernier, L., Pouliot, G., and MacLean, W.H., 1987, Geology and metamor-phism of the Montauban North Gold Zone: A metamorphosed poly-metallic exhalative deposit, Grenville Province, Quebec: EconomicGeology, v. 82, p. 2076-2090.
Bethune, K.M., 1997, The Sudbury dyke swarm and its bearing on the tec-tonic development of the Grenville Front, Ontario, Canada:Precambrian Research, v. 85, p. 117-146.
Bickford, M.E., Soegaard, K., Nielsen, K.C., and McLelland, J.M., 2000,Geology and geochronology of Grenville-age rocks in the Van Hornand Franklin Mountains area, west Texas: Implications for the tectonicevolution of Laurentia during the Grenville: Geological Society ofAmerica Bulletin, v. 112, p. 1134-1148.
Blein, O., LaFlèche, M.R., and Corriveau, L., 2003, Geochemistry of thegranulitic Bondy Gneiss Complex: A 1.4 Ga arc in the Central
Metasedimentary Belt, Grenville Province, Canada: PrecambrianResearch, v. 120, p. 193-218.
Blein, O., Corriveau, L., and LaFlèche, M.R., 2004, Cordierite-orthopyrox-ene white gneiss: A key to unveiling pre-metamorphic hydrothermalactivity in the Bondy gneiss complex, Grenville Province, Québec, inTollo, R., Corriveau, L., McLelland, J., and Bartholomew, M., eds.,Proterozoic Tectonic Evolution of the Grenville Orogen in easternNorth America: Geological Society of America, Memoir 197, p. 19-33.
Boggs, K.J.E., and Corriveau, L., 2004, Granulite P-T-t paths and retrogradecation diffusion from the Mont-Laurier area, southwestern GrenvilleProvince, Quebec, in Tollo, R., Corriveau, L., McLelland, J., andBartholomew, M., eds., Proterozoic Tectonic Evolution of the GrenvilleOrogen in eastern North America: Geological Society of America,Memoir 197, p. 35-64.
Bonnet, A.-L. and Corriveau, L., 2007, Alteration vectors to metamor-phosed hydrothermal systems in gneissic terranes, in Goodfellow,W.D., ed., Mineral Deposits of Canada: A Synthesis of Major Deposit-Types, District Metallogeny, the Evolution of Geological Provinces,and Exploration Methods: Geological Association of Canada, MineralDeposits Division, Special Publication No. 5, p. 1035-1049.
Bonnet, A.-L., Corriveau, L., and LaFlèche, M.R., 2005, Chemical imprintof highly metamorphosed volcanic-hosted hydrothermal alterations inthe La Romaine Supracrustal Belt, eastern Grenville Province, Quebec:Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 42, p. 1783-1814.
Cadéron, S., Roy, P., and Bandyayera, D., 2004, New metallogenic, geolog-ical and metamorphic data from the Grenville Front: QuébecExploration 2004, Abstracts of Oral Presentations and Posters, p. 111.
Carr, S.D., Easton, R.M., Jamieson, R.A., and Culshaw, N.G., 2000,Geologic transect across the Grenville orogen of Ontario and NewYork: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 37, p. 193-216.
Carter, T.R., 1984, Metallogeny of the Grenville Province, southeasternOntario: Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 5515, 422 p.
Chevé, S., Gobeil, A., Clark, T., Corriveau, L., and Perreault, S., 1999,Géologie de la région du lac Manitou (SNRC 22I/14): Ministère desRessources naturelles, Québec, RG 99-02, 69 p.
Ciesielski, A., and Sharma, K.N.M., 1995, Geochemistry and petrogenesisof 1280 Ma tonalitic orthogneisses of the Central Metasedimentary Beltof the Grenville Province, Quebec: International Conference onTectonics and Metallogeny of Early/Mid Precambrian orogenic Belt,Precambrian 1995, Program with Abstracts, p. 307.
Cimon, J., and McCann, J., 2000, Le gîte d’apatite-ilménite du complexemafique lité d’âge Cambrien de Sept-Îles, Québec: Chronique de laRecherche minière, v. 539, p. 63-83.
Clark, T., 2000, Le potentiel en Cu-Ni±Co±EGP du Grenville québécois:exemples de minéralisations magmatiques et remobilisées: Chroniquede la Recherche minière, v. 539, p. 85-100.
——— 2001a, Distribution and exploration potential of platinum-groupelements in Québec: Ministère des Ressources naturelles, Québec, PRO 2001-06, 13 p.
——— 2001b, Distribution et potentiel des EGP au Québec: Ministère desRessources naturelles, Québec, http://www.mrn.gouv.qc.ca/publica-tions/mines/potentiel/Cf200106.pdf.
——— 2003, Métallogénie des métaux usuels et précieux, des élémentsradioactifs et des éléments des terres rares, région de la moyenne Côte-Nord, in Brisebois, D., and Clark, T., eds., Géologie et Ressourcesminérales de la Partie Est de la Province de Grenville: Ministère desRessources naturelles de la Faune et des Parcs, Québec, DV 2002-03,p. 269-326.
Clark, T., Gobeil, A., and David, J.,2005, Iron oxide-Cu-Au-type and relateddeposits in the Manitou Lake area, eastern Grenville Province, Quebec:variations in setting, composition, and style: Canadian Journal of EarthSciences, v. 42, p. 1829-1847.
Clarke, P.-J., 1977, Gagnon Area: Ministère des Richesses naturelles,Québec, Geological Report 178, 79 p.
Connelly, J.N., Rivers, T., and James, D.T., 1995, Thermotectonic evolutionof the Grenville Province of western Labrador: Tectonics, v. 14, p. 202-217.
Cooke, D.R., Bull, S.W., Large, R.R., and McGoldrick, P.J., 2000, Theimportance of oxidized brines for the formation of AustralianProterozoic stratiform sediment-hosted Pb-Zn (Sedex) deposits:Economic Geology, v. 95, p. 1-17.
Corrigan, D., and Hanmer, S., 1997, Anorthosites and related granitoids inthe Grenville orogen: a product of convective thinning of the litho-sphere?: Geology, v. 25, no. 1, p. 61-64.
Corrigan, D., and van Breemen, O., 1997, U-Pb age constraints for the litho-tectonic evolution of the Grenville Province along the Mauricie tran-sect, Quebec: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 34, p. 299-316.
Corrigan, D., Culshaw, N.G., and Mortensen, J.K., 1994, Pre-Grenvillianevolution and Grenvillian overprinting of the Parautochthonous Belt inKey Harbour, Ontario: U-Pb and field constraints: Canadian Journal ofEarth Sciences, v. 31, p. 583-596.
Corrigan, D., Rivers, T., and Dunning, G., 2000, U-Pb constraints for theplutonic and tectonometamorphic evolution of Lake Melville terrane,Labrador and implications for basement reworking in the northeasternGrenville Province: Precambrian Research, v. 99, p. 65-90.
Corriveau, L., 1989, Potassic alkaline plutonism in the southwesternGrenville Province: PhD thesis, McGill University, Montréal, 263 p.
——— 2007, Iron oxide copper-gold deposits: A Canadian perspective, inGoodfellow, W.D., ed., Mineral Deposits of Canada: A Synthesis ofMajor Deposit-Types, District Metallogeny, the Evolution ofGeological Provinces, and Exploration Methods: GeologicalAssociation of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special PublicationNo. 5, p. 307-328.
Corriveau, L., and Bonnet, A.-L., 2005, Pinwarian (1.5 Ga) volcanism andhydrothermal activity at the eastern margin of the Wakeham Group,Grenville Province, Quebec: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 42,p. 1749-1782.
Corriveau, L., and Clark, T., 2005, The Grenville Province: A geological andmineral resources perspective derived from government and academic research initiatives: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 42, p. 1637-1642.
Corriveau, L., and Gorton, M.P., 1993, Coexisting K-rich alkaline andshoshonitic magmatism of arc affinities in the Proterozoic: A reassess-ment of syenitic stocks in the southwestern Grenville Province:Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 113, p. 262-279.
Corriveau, L., and Morin, D., 2000, Modelling 3D architecture of westernGrenville from xenoliths, styles of magma emplacement andLithoprobe reflectors: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 37, p. 235-251.
Corriveau, L., and van Breemen, O., 2000, Docking of the CentralMetasedimentary Belt to Laurentia in geon 12: evidence from the 1.17-1.16 Ga Chevreuil intrusive suite and host gneisses, Quebec: CanadianJournal of Earth Sciences, v. 37, p. 253-269.
Corriveau, L., Rivard, B., and van Breemen, O., 1998, Rheological controlson Grenvillian intrusive suites: implications for tectonic analysis:Journal of Structural Geology, v. 20, p. 1191-1204.
Corriveau, L., Brouillette, P., Scherrer, G., and Bonnet, A.-L., 2002,Extension orientale des roches volcaniques du Groupe de Wakeham etl’intrusion litée troctolitique de Musquaro, Province de Grenville,Basse-Côte-Nord, Québec: Commission géologique du Canada, Étude02-C29, 11 p.
Cox, R.A., and Indares, A., 1999, Transformation of Fe-Ti gabbro to coro-nite, eclogite and amphibolite in the Baie du Nord segment,Manicouagan imbricate zone, eastern Grenville Province: Journal ofMetamorphic Geology, v. 17, p. 537-555.
Cox, R.A., Dunning, G.R., and Indares, A., 1998, Petrology and U-Pbgeochronology of mafic, high-pressure, metamorphic coronites fromthe Tshenukutish Domain, eastern Grenville Province: PrecambrianResearch, v. 90, p. 59-83.
Culshaw, N.G., and Dostal, J., 1997, Sand Bay gneiss association, GrenvilleProvince, Ontario: a Grenvillian rift- (and -drift) assemblage strandedin the Central Gneiss Belt?: Precambrian Research, v. 85, p. 97-113.
——— 2002, Amphibolites of the Shawanaga Domain, Central Gneiss Belt,Grenville Province, Ontario: Tectonic setting and implications for rela-tions between the Central Gneiss Belt and Midcontinental USA:Precambrian Research, v. 113, p. 65-85.
Culshaw, N.G., 2005, Intersection of the Shawanaga and Parry Sound shearzones, Central Gneiss Belt, Grenville Province, Ontario: buckling andshearing related to flow in the deep crust: Canadian Journal of EarthSciences, v. 42, p. 1907-1925.
Culshaw, N.G., Jamieson, R.A., Ketchum, J.W.F., Wodicka, N., Corrigan,D., and Reynolds, P.H., 1997, Transect across the northwesternGrenville Orogen, Georgian Bay, Ontario: Polystage convergence andextension in the lower orogenic crust: Tectonics, v. 16, p. 966-982.
Cuney, M., and Kish, L., 2004, Minéralisations uranifères et fusion crustale:l’exemple de Mont Laurier (Québec, Canada). 72ième congrès del’ACFAS, C-202 Premières journées De Launay, Programme etrésumés, http://www.acfas.ca/congres/congres72/C3598.htm.
Currie, K.L., and Gittins, J., 1988, Contrasting sapphirine parageneses fromWilson Lake, Labrador and their tectonic significance: Journal ofMetamorphic Geology, v. 6, p. 603-622.
Daigneault, R., and Allard, G.O., 1994, Transformation of Archean struc-tural inheritance at the Grenvillian foreland parautochthon transitionzone, Chibougamau, Quebec: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 31, p. 470-488.
Davidson, A., 1984, Identification of ductile shear zones in the southwest-ern Grenville Province of the Canadian Shield, in Kröner, A. andGreiling, R., eds., Precambrian tectonics illustrated:Schweitzerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart, p. 263-279.
——— 1986, Grenville Front relationships near Killarney, Ontario, inMoore, J.M., Davidson, A., and Baer, A.J., eds., The Grenville Province:Geological Association of Canada, Special Paper 31, p. 107-117.
——— 1995, A review of the Grenville orogen in its North American typearea: AGSO Journal of Australian Geology and Geophysics, v. 16, p. 3-24.
——— 1998a, An overview of Grenville Province geology, CanadianShield; Chapter 3 in Lucas, S.B., and St-Onge, M.R., coordinators,Geology of the Precambrian Superior and Grenville Provinces andPrecambrian Fossils in North America: Geological Survey of Canada,Geology of Canada, no. 7, p. 205-270 (also Geological Society ofAmerica, The Geology of North America, v. C-1).
——— 1998b, Geological map of the Grenville Province, Canada and adja-cent parts of the United States of America: Geological Survey ofCanada, Map 1947A, scale 1:2,000,000.
——— 2000, Geology of the Mountain Grove pluton, CentralMetasedimentary Belt, Grenville Province, Ontario: Geological Surveyof Canada, Current Research 2000-C23, 7 p.
——— 2001, The Chief Lake complex revisited, and the problem of corre-lation across the Grenville Front south of Sudbury, Ontario:Precambrian Research, v. 107, p. 5-29.
Davidson, A., and van Breemen, O., 1994, U-Pb ages of granites near theGrenville Front: Geological Survey of Canada, Current Research 1994-F, p. 107-114.
——— 2000, Age and Extent of the Frontenac Plutonic Suite in the CentralMetasedimentary Belt, Grenville Province, southeastern Ontario;Geological Survey of Canada, Paper 2000-F, 7 p.
de Lorraine, W.F., 2001, Metamorphism, polydeformation, and extensiveremobilization of the Balmat zinc orebodies, northwest Adirondacks,New York: Society of Economic Geologists, Guidebook Series, v. 5, p. 25-54.
de Lorraine, W.F., and Dill, D.B., 1982, Structure, stratigraphic controls andgenesis of the Balmat zinc deposits, NW Adirondacks, New York, inHutchinson, R.W., Spence, C.D., and Franklin, J.M., eds., PrecambrianSulphide Deposits: Geological Association of Canada, Special Paper25, p. 571-596.
Deland, A.N., 1959, Report on development work: Ministère desRessources naturelles, Québec, GM 08334, 2 p.
Dewey, J.F., and Burke, K.C., 1973, Tibetan, Variscan and Precambrianbasement reactivation: Products of continental collision. Journal ofGeology, v. 81, p. 683-692.
Dickin, A.P., 2000, Crustal formation in the Grenville Province; Nd-isotopeevidence: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 37, p. 165-181.
——— 2004, Mesoproterozoic and Paleoproterozoic crustal growth in theeastern Grenville Province: Nd isotope evidence from the Long Rangeinlier of the Appalachian orogen, in Tollo, R.P., Corriveau, L.,McLelland, J., and Bartholomew, M., eds., Proterozoic TectonicEvolution of the Grenville Orogen in North America: GeologicalSociety of America, Memoir 197, p. 495-504.
Duchesne, J.-C., Liégeois, J.P., Vander Auwera, J., and Longhi, J., 1999,The crustal tongue melting model and the origin of massiveanorthosites: Terra Nova, v. 11, p. 100-105.
Easton, R.M., 1989, Regional alteration patterns and mineralization associ-ated with the Deloro Granite, Grenville Province, Madoc area, inSummary of Field Work and Other Activities, 1989: Ontario GeologicalSurvey, Miscellaneous Paper 146, p. 158-168.
——— 1992, The Grenville Province and the Proterozoic history of centraland southern Ontario, in Thurston, P.C., Williams, H.R., Sutcliffe, R.H.,
L. Corriveau, S. Perreault, and A. Davidson
842
Prospective Metallogenic Settings of the Grenville Province
843
and Stott, G.M., eds., Geology of Ontario: Ontario Geological Survey,Special Volume 4(2), p. 715-904.
——— 2000, Metamorphism of the Canadian shield, Ontario, Canada. II.Proterozoic metamorphic history: The Canadian Mineralogist, v. 38, p. 319-344.
——— 2003a, Project unit 03-009. Reconnaissance study of the geologyand mineral potential of the eastern Tomiko terrane, GrenvilleProvince, in Summary of Field Work and Other Activities 2003:Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 6120, p. 16-1-16-25.
——— 2003b, Geology and Mineral Potential of the PaleoproterozoicRiver Valley Intrusion and Related Rocks, Grenville Province: OntarioGeological Survey, Open File Report 6123, 172 p.
Easton, R.M., and Fyon, J.A., 1992, Metallogeny of the Grenville Province,in Thurston, P.C., Williams, H.R., Sutcliffe, R.H., and Stott, G.M., eds.,Geology of Ontario: Ontario Geological Survey, Special Volume 4(2),p. 1217-1254.
Eckstrand, O.R., Sinclair, W.D., and Thorpe, R.I., 1996, Introduction, inEckstrand, O.R., Sinclair, W.D., and Thorpe, R.I., eds., Geology ofCanadian Mineral Deposit Types: Geological Survey of Canada,Geology of Canada, no. 8, p. 1-8.
Eilu, P., Sorjonen-Ward, P., Nurmi, P., and Niiranen, T., 2003, A review ofgold mineralization styles in Finland: Economic Geology, v. 98, p. 1329-1353.
Emslie, R.F., 1978, Anorthosite massifs, rapakivi granites and lateProterozoic rifting of North America: Precambrian Research, v. 7, p. 61-98.
Emslie, R.F., Hamilton, M.A., and Gower, C.F., 1997, The Michael gabbroand other Mesoproterozoic lithospheric probes in southern and centralLabrador: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 34, p. 1566-1580.
Friedman, R., and Martignole, J., 1995, Mesoproterozoic sedimentation,magmatism, and metamorphism in the southern part of the GrenvilleProvince (western Quebec): U-Pb geochronological constraints:Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 32, p. 2103-2114.
Friehauf, K.C., Smith II, R.C., and Volkert, R.A., 2002, Comparison of thegeology of Proterozoic iron oxide deposits in the Adirondack and Mid-Atlantic belt of Pennsylvania, New Jersey and New York, in Porter,T.M., ed., Hydrothermal Iron Oxide Copper-Gold and Related Deposits:A Global Perspective: PGC Publishing, Adelaide, v. 2, p. 247-252.
Fu, W., Corriveau, L., LaFlèche, M.R., and Blein, O., 2003, Birdwing-shaped REE profiles and /or isovalent Nb/Ta, Zr/Hf ratios in the BondyGneiss Complex, Grenville Province, Québec: Sensitive geochemicalmarkers of a fossil hydrothermal system in mineral exploration:Canadian Institute of Mining Industry Conference and Exhibition,Montreal 2003, Canadian Institute of Mining, Technical Paper (CD-ROM), 17 p.
Gandhi, S.S., 1986, Uranium in Early Proterozoic Aillik Group, Labrador,in Evans, E.L., ed., Uranium Deposits of Canada, Canadian Institute ofMining and Metallurgy, Special Volume 33, p. 70-82.
Gariépy, C., Verner, D., and Doig, R., 1990, Dating Archean metamorphicminerals southeast of the Grenville front, western Quebec, using Pbisotopes: Geology, v. 18, p. 1078-1081.
Gauthier, M., and Brown, A.C., 1986, Zinc and iron metallogeny in theManiwaki-Gracefield district, southwestern Quebec: EconomicGeology, v. 81, p. 89-112.
Gauthier, M., and Chartrand, F., 2005, Metallogeny of the Grenville Provincerevisited: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 42, p. 1719-1734.
Gauthier, M., Morin, G., and Marcoux, P., 1985, Minéralisations aurifères dela partie centrale de la Province de Grenville, Bouclier canadien:Canadian Institute of Mining Bulletin, v. 78, p. 60-69.
Gauthier, M., Chartrand, F., Cayer, A., and David, J., 2004a, The KwyjiboCu-REE-U-Au-Mo-F property, Quebec: A Mesoproterozoic polymetal-lic iron oxide deposit in the Northeastern Grenville Province:Economic Geology, v. 99, p. 1177-1196.
Gauthier, M., Corriveau, L., and Chouteau, M., 2004b, Metamorphosed andMetamorphogenic Ore Deposits of the Central Metasedimentary Belt,southwestern Québec and southeastern Ontario Grenville Province:Premières Journées De Launay, Post-symposium Field Trip Guidebook,20 p.
Gauthier, M., Gardoll, S., and Duchesne, J.-C., 2004c, Quest for palladium:Application of the Groves hypothesis to Precambrian terranes of north-east North America: Geology, v. 32, p. 593-596.
Gilbert, J.E., 1959, Bristol Township-Hilton Mines Ltd, in Description ofMining Properties Examined in 1956 and 1957 (exclusive of producing
mines) and Outline of Geology and Exploration Work: Department ofMines, Québec, Preliminary Report 390, p. 14-15.
Gobeil, A., 1997, Géologie de la Région de la Rivière Sainte-Marguerite(Phase II): Ministère des Ressources Naturelles, Québec, MB 96-43,12 p.
Gobeil, A., Chevé, S., Clark, T., Corriveau, L., Perreault, S., and Dion, D.-J., 1999, Géologie de la Région du Lac Nipisso (SNRC 22I/13):Ministère des Ressources Naturelles, Québec, RG 98-19, 60 p.
Gobeil, A., Hébert, C., Clark, T., Beaumier, M., and Perreault, S., 2002,Géologie de la Région du lac De La Blache (22K03/ et 22K/04):Ministère des Ressources naturelles, Québec, RG 2002-01, 49 p.
Gobeil, A., Brisebois, D., Clark, T., Verpaelst, P., Madore, L., Wodicka, N.,and Chevé, S., 2003, Synthèse géologique de la région de Manitou-Wakeham (moyenne-côte-nord), in Brisebois, D., and Clark, T., eds.,Géologie et Ressources minérales de la Partie est de la Province deGrenville: Ministère des Ressources naturelles de la Faune et des Parcs,Québec, DV 2002-03, p. 9-58.
Gower, C.F., 1992, The relevance of Baltic Shield metallogeny to mineralexploration in Labrador, in Current Research: Newfoundland andLabrador Geological Survey, Report No. 92-1, p. 331-366.
——— 1996, The evolution of the Grenville Province in eastern Labrador,Canada, in Brewer, T.S., ed., Precambrian Crustal Evolution in theNorth Atlantic Region: Geological Society Special Publication, v. 112,p. 197-218.
Gower, C.F., and Krogh, T.E., 2002, A U-Pb geochronological review of theProterozoic history of the eastern Grenville Province: Canadian Journalof Earth Sciences, v. 39, p. 795-829.
——— 2003, A U-Pb geochronological review of the Pre-Labradorian andLabradorian geological history of the eastern Grenville Province, inBrisebois, D., and Clark, T., eds., Géologie et Ressources minérales dela Partie est de la Province de Grenville: Ministère des RessourcesNaturelles de la Faune et des Parcs, Québec, DV 2002-03, p. 147-172.
Gower, C.F., Ryan, A.B., and Rivers, T., 1990, Mid-Proterozoic Laurentia-Baltica: an overview of its geological evolution and a summary of thecontributions made by this volume, in Gower, C.F., Rivers, T., andRyan, A.B., eds., Mid-Proterozoic Laurentia-Baltica: GeologicalAssociation of Canada, Special Paper 38, p. 1-20.
Gower, C.F., McConnell, J.W., and van Nostrand, T., 1995, New mineral-exploration targets in the Pinware Terrane, Grenville Province, south-west Labrador, in Current Research: Newfoundland and LabradorGeological Survey, Report No. 95-1, p. 15-24.
Gower, C.F., Krogh, T.E., and James, D.T., 2002, Correlation chart of theeastern Grenville Province and its northern foreland: Canadian Journalof Earth Sciences, v. 39, p. 897.
Green, A.G., Milkereit, B., Davidson, A., Spencer, C., Hutchinson, D.R.,Cannon, W.F., Lee, M.W., Agena, W.F., Behrendt, J.C., and Hinze, W.J.,1988, Crustal structure of the Grenville Front and adjacent terranes:Geology, v. 16, p. 788-792.
Gross, G.A., 1967, Iron deposits in the Appalachians and Grenville regionsof Canada, in Volume II, Geology of Iron Deposits in Canada:Geological Survey of Canada, Economic Geology Report 22, p. 76-80.
——— 1996, Stratiform iron, in Eckstrand, O.R., Sinclair, W.D., andThorpe, R.I., eds., Geology of Canadian Mineral Deposit Types:Geological Survey of Canada, Geology of Canada, no. 8, p. 47-90.
Hamilton, M.A., McLelland, J., and Selleck, B., 2004, SHRIMP U-Pb zir-con geochronology of the anorthosite-mangerite-charnockite-granitesuite, Adirondack Mountains, New York: Ages of emplacement andmetamorphism, in Tollo, R., Corriveau, L., McLelland, J., andBartholomew, M., eds., Proterozoic Tectonic Evolution of the GrenvilleOrogen in eastern North America: Geological Society of America,Memoir 197, p. 337-355.
Hanmer, S., 1988, Ductile thrusting at mid-crustal level, southwesternGrenville Province: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 25, p. 1049-1059.
Hanmer, S., Corrigan, D., Pehrsson, S., and Nadeau, L., 2000, SW GrenvilleProvince, Canada: The case against post-1.4 Ga accretionary tectonics:Tectonophysics, v. 319, p. 33-51.
Hauseux, M.A., 1977, Mode of uranium occurence in a migmatitic graniteterrain, Baie-Johan-Beetz, Quebec: Canadian Institute of MiningBulletin, v. 70, p. 110-116.
Haynes, S.J., 1986, Metallogenesis of U-Th, Grenville Supergroup,Peterborough County, Ontario, in Moore, J.M., Davidson, A., and Baer,
A.J., eds., The Grenville Province: Geological Association of Canada,Special Paper, v. 31, p. 271-280.
Heaman, L.M., Erdmer, P., and Owen, J.V., 2002, U-Pb geochronologicconstraints on the crustal evolution of the Long Range Inlier,Newfoundland: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 39, p. 845-865.
Heaman, L.M., Gower, C.F., and Perreault, S., 2004, The timing ofProterozoic magmatism in the Pinware terrane of southeast Labrador,easternmost Quebec and northwest Newfoundland: Canadian Journalof Earth Sciences, v. 41, p. 127-150.
Hébert, C., and van Breemen, O., 2004, Mesoproterozoic basement, theLac-St. Jean anorthosite suite and younger Grenvillian intrusions in theSaguenay region (Quebec): Structural relationships and U-Pbgeochronology, in Tollo, R., Corriveau, L., McLelland, J., andBartholomew, M., eds., Proterozoic Tectonic Evolution of the GrenvilleOrogen in eastern North America: Geological Society of America,Memoir 197, p. 65-79.
Hébert, C., Cadieux, A.-M., and van Breemen, O., 2005, The Labrieville,Lac St. Jean, De La Blache, and St. Urbain anorthosites, CentralGrenville, Quebec, Canada: Comparison of U-Pb ages and Ti-Fe-Poccurrences: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 42, p. 1865-1880.
Hébert, Y., 1993, Principales Sources de Silicates Alumineux au Québec:Ministère des Ressources Naturelles, Québec, MB 93-59, 56 p.
——— 1995, Les Gîtes de Terres rares et Éléments associés dans lesDistricts miniers de Montréal-Laurentides, Estrie-Laurentides et Côte-Nord-Nouveau-Québec: Ministère des Ressources naturelles, Québec,MB 94-17, 140 p.
Higgins, M.D., 2005, A new interpretation of the structure of the Sept IlesIntrusive suite, Canada: Lithos, v. 83, p. 199- 213.
Higgins, M.D., and van Breemen, O., 1996, Three generations of AMCGmagmatism, contact metamorphism and tectonism in the Saguenay-Lac-St. Jean region, Grenville Province, Canada: PrecambrianResearch, v. 7, p. 327-346.
Hudon, P., Friedman, R.M., Gauthier, G., and Martignole, J., 2006, Age ofthe Cabonga nepheline syenite, Grenville Province Western Quebec:Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 43, p. 1237-1249.
Indares, A., and Dunning, G., 2004, Crustal architecture above the high-pressure belt of the Grenville Province in the Manicouagan area: Newstructural, petrologic and U-Pb age constraints: Precambrian Research,v. 130, p. 199-228.
Irvine, T.N., Andersen, J.C.O., and Brooks, C.K., 1998, Included blocks(and blocks within blocks) in the Skaergaard intrusion: Geologic rela-tions and the origin of rhythmic modally graded layers: GeologicalSociety of America Bulletin, v. 110, p. 1398-1447.
Jacob, H.-L., and Bélanger, M., 2001, Les minéraux industriels au Québec,in Dunlop, S., and Simandl, G., eds., Industrial Minerals in Canada:Canadian Institute of Mining, Special Volume 53, p. 187-198.
James, D.T., Kamo, S., Krogh, T., and Nadeau, L., 2001, Preliminary U-Pbgeochronological data from Mesoproterozoic rocks Grenville Province,southern Labrador, in Current Research: Newfoundland and LabradorDepartment of Mines and Energy, Geological Survey, Report 2001-1,p. 45-54.
James, R.S., Easton, R.M., Peck, D.C., and Hrominchuck, J.L., 2002, TheEast Bull Lake intrusive suite: Remnants of an approximately 2.48 Galarge igneous and metallogenic province in the Sudbury area of theCanadian Shield: Economic Geology, v. 97, p. 1577-1606.
Jobin-Bevans, L.S., 2002, Geology and PGE mineralisation along the north-ern contact of the River Valley intrusion, Sudbury region, Ontario: 9thInternational Platinum Conference, Billings, USA, 2 p.
Johnson, C.A., and Skinner, B.J., 2003, Geochemistry of the Furnace mag-netite bed, Franklin, New Jersey, and the relationship between strati-form iron oxide and stratiform zinc oxide silicate ores in the NewJersey Highlands: Economic Geology, v. 98, p. 837-854.
Jordan, S.L., Indares, A., and Dunning, G., 2006, Partial melting ofmetapelites in the Gagnon terrane below the high pressure belt in theManicouagan area (Grenville Province): Pressure-temperature (P-T)and U-Pb age constraints and implications: Canadian Journal of EarthSciences, v. 43, p. 1309-1329.
Jourdain, V., Gauthier, M., and Guha, J., 1990, Métallogénie de l’Or dans lesud-ouest de la Province de Grenville: Geological Survey of Canada,Open File Report 2287, 50 p.
in southern Laurentia, its extensions to Australia and Baltica, and impli-cations for refining Rodinia: Precambrian Research, v. 111, p. 5-30.
Ketchum, J.W.F., and Davidson, A., 2000, Crustal architecture and tectonicassembly of the Central Gneiss Belt, southwestern Grenville Province,Canada: A new interpretation: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 37, p. 217-234.
Ketchum, J.W.F., Jamieson, R.A., Heaman, L.M., Culshaw, N.G., andKrogh, T.E., 1994, 1.45 Ga granulites in the southwestern GrenvilleProvince: Geologic setting, P-T conditions, and U-Pb geochronology:Geology, v. 22, p. 215-218.
Klein, C., 1978, Regional metamorphism of Proterozoic iron formation,Labrador Trough, Canada: American Mineralogist, v. 63, p. 898-912.
Kletetschka, G., and Stout, J.H., 1998, The origin of magnetic anomalies inlower crustal rocks, Labrador: Geophysical Research Letters, v. 25, p. 199-202.
Korhonen, F.J., and Stout, J.H., 2004, Low variance sapphirine-bearingassemblages from Wilson Lake, Grenville Province of Labrador, inTollo, R.P., Corriveau, L., McLelland, J., and Bartholomew, M., eds,Proterozoic Tectonic Evolution of the Grenville Orogen in NorthAmerica: Geological Society of America, Memoir 197, p. 81-104.
——— 2006, Silicate-oxide equilibria in the Wilson Lake terrane, Labrador- evidence for a pre-metamorphic oxidizing event. AmericanGeophysical Union, 2006 Joint Assembly Meeting, Program withAbstract, http://www.agu.org/meetings/sm06/sm06-sessions/sm06_U21A.html
Krauss, J.B., and Rivers, T., 2004, High-pressure granulites in theGrenvillian Grand Lake thrust system, Labrador: P-T conditions andtectonic evolution, in Tollo, R.P., Corriveau, L., McLelland, J., andBartholomew, M., eds, Proterozoic Tectonic Evolution of the GrenvilleOrogen in North America: Geological Society of America, Memoir197, p. 105-134.
Krogh, T.E., 1989, Provenance and metamorphic ages in the Grenville(NW): Lithoprobe Abitibi-Grenville project workshop, March 1989,p. 5-7.
Krogh, T.E., Kamo, S., Gower, C.F., and Owen, J.V., 2002, Augmented andreassessed U-Pb geochronological data from the Labradorian-Grenvillian front in the Smokey archipelago, eastern Labrador:Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 39, p. 831-843.
LaFlèche, M.R., Birkett, T., and Corriveau, L., 2005, Crustal developmentat the pre-Grenvillian Laurentian margin: A record from contrastinggeochemistry of mafic and ultramafic orthogneisses in theChochocouane River area, Quebec: Canadian Journal of EarthSciences, v. 42, p. 1653-1675.
Larbi, Y., Stevenson, R., Verpaelst, P., Brisebois, D., and Madore, L., 2003,Caractérisation isotopique (Sm-Nd) et géochimie du groupe deWakeham: Un bassin sédimentaire protérozoïque dans la Province deGrenville, in Brisebois, D., and Clark, T., eds., Géologie et RessourcesMinérales de la Partie est de la Province de Grenville: Ministère desRessources naturelles de la Faune et des Parcs, Québec, DV 2002-03,p. 247-268.
Large, R.R., McPhie, J., Gemmel, J.B., Herrmann, W., and Davidson, J.,2001, The spectrum of ore deposit types, volcanic environments, alter-ation halos, and related exploration vectors in submarine volcanic suc-cessions: Some examples from Australia: Economic Geology, v. 96, p. 913-938.
Lentz, D.R., 1996, U, Mo, and REE mineralization in the late-tectonicgranitic pegmatites, southwestern Grenville Province, Canada: OreGeology Reviews, v. 11, p. 197-227.
Lentz, D.R., and Creaser, R., 2005, Re-Os model age constraints on the gen-esis of the Moss molybdenite pegmatite-aplite deposits, southwesternGrenville Province, Quyon, Quebec, Canada: Exploration and MiningGeology, v. 14, p. 95-103.
Leong, K.M., and Moore, J.M., 1972, Sapphirine-bearing rocks fromWilson Lake, Labrador: The Canadian Mineralogist, v. 11, p. 777-790.
Loney, R.A., and Himmelberg, G.R., 1983, Structure and petrology of the LaPerouse gabbro intrusion, Fairweather range, southeastern Alaska:Journal of Petrology, v. 24, p. 377-423.
Lowell, G.R., and Noll, P.D., Jr, 2001. Fe-Cu-Au-bearing scapolite skarn inmoat sediments of the Taum Sauk Caldera, southeastern Missouri,USA: Mineralogical Magazine, v. 65, p. 373-396.
Lowell, G.R., and Young, G.J., 1999, Interaction between coeval mafic andfelsic melts in the St. Francois Terrane of Missouri, USA: PrecambrianResearch, v. 95, p. 69-88.
L. Corriveau, S. Perreault, and A. Davidson
844
Prospective Metallogenic Settings of the Grenville Province
845
Ludden, J., and Hynes, A., 2000a, The Abitibi-Grenville Lithoprobe transectPart III: Introduction: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 37, p. 115-116.
——— 2000b, The Lithoprobe Abitibi-Grenville transect: Two billion yearsof crust formation and recycling in the Precambrian Shield of Canada:Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 37, p. 459-476.
Lyons, P., Goleby, B., Jones, L., Drummond, B., and Korsch, R., 2004,Imaging the tectonic environment of the giant Olympic Dam ironoxide-copper-gold deposit, South Australia: 11th Deep SeismixConference, Program with Abstracts, p. 72.
Magrina, B., Jébrak, M., and Cuney, M., 2005, Le magmatisme de la régionde Kwyjibo, Province du Grenville (Canada) : intérêt pour les minéral-isations de type fer-oxydes associées: Canadian journal of EarthSciences, v. 42, p. 1849-1864.
Marshall, L.J., and Oliver, N.H.S., 2006, Monitoring fluid chemistry in ironoxide-copper-gold-related metasomatic processes, eastern Mt IsaBlock, Australia: Geofluids, v. 6, p. 45-66.
Marshall, L.J., Smith, R., Wilton, D., and Butler, R., 2003, Geology and pre-liminary exploration results, Central Mineral Belt, Labrador, Canada:Altius Minerals Corporation and Fronteer Development Group,Internal Report, 52 p.
Martignole, J., Machado, N., and Nantel, S., 1993, Timing of intrusion anddeformation of the Rivière-Pentecôte anorthosite (Grenville Province):The Journal of Geology, v. 101, p. 652-658.
Martignole, J., Machado, N., and Indares, A., 1994, The Wakeham Terrane:A Mesoproterozoic terrestrial rift in the eastern part of the GrenvilleProvince: Precambrian Research, v. 68, p. 291-306.
Martignole, J., Calvert, A.J., Friedman, R., and Reynolds, P., 2000, Crustalevolution along a seismic section across the Grenville Province (west-ern Quebec): Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 37, p. 291-306.
Martin, C., and Dickin, A.P., 2005, Styles of Proterozoic crustal growth onthe southeast margin of Laurentia: Evidence from the central GrenvilleProvince northwest of Lac St.-Jean, Quebec: Canadian Journal of EarthSciences, v. 42, p. 1643-1652.
McLelland, J., Daly, S., and McLelland J.M., 1996, The Grenville OrogenicCycle (ca 1350-1000 Ma): An Adirondack perspective: Tectonophysics,v. 265, p. 1-28.
McLelland, J., Morrison, J., Selleck, B., Cunningham, B., Olson, C., andSchmidt, K., 2002, Hydrothermal alteration of late- to post-tectonicLyon Mt. Granitic Gneiss, Adirondack Highlands, New York: Origin ofquartz-sillimanite segregations, quartz-albite lithologies, and associatedKiruna-type low-Ti Fe-oxide deposits: Journal of MetamorphicGeology, v. 20, p. 175-190.
Meert, J.G., and Powell, C.M., 2001, Assembly and break-up of Rodinia:Introduction to the special volume: Precambrian Research, v. 110, p. 1-8.
Menuge, J.F., Brewer, T.S., and Seeger, C.M., 2002, Petrogenesis of meta-luminous A-type rhyolites from the St Francois Mountains, Missouriand the Mesoproterozoic evolution of the southern Laurentian margin:Precambrian Research, v. 113, p. 269-291.
Moore, J.M., 1986, Introduction: The ‘Grenville Problem’ then and now, inMoore, J.M., Davidson, A., and Baer, A.J., eds., The GrenvilleProvince: Geological Association of Canada, Special Paper 31, p. 9-11.
Moore, J.M., and Thompson, P., 1980, The Flinton group: A late Precambrianmetasedimentary sequence in the Grenville Province of eastern Ontario:Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 17, p. 1685-1707.
Moore, J.M., Davidson, A., and Baer, A.J., eds., 1986, The GrenvilleProvince: Geological Association of Canada, Special Paper 31, 358 p.
Morin, D., Hébert, R., and Corriveau, L., 2005, Mesoproterozoic deep K-magmatism recorded in a megacryst- and xenolith-bearing minettedyke, western Grenville Province: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences,v. 42, p. 1881-1906.
Mumin, A.H., and Corriveau, L., 2004, The Eden deformation corridor andpolymetallic mineral belt: Trans Hudson Orogen, Leaf Rapids District,Manitoba: Manitoba Geological Survey, Report of Activities 2004, p. 69-91.
Nabil, H., Clark, T., and Barnes, S.-J., 2004, A Ni-Cu-Co-PGE massive sul-phide prospect in a gabbronorite dike at Lac Volant, eastern GrenvilleProvince, Quebec, in Tollo, R.P., Corriveau, L., McLelland, J., andBartholomew, M., eds., Proterozoic Tectonic Evolution of the GrenvilleOrogen in North America: Geological Society of America, Memoir197, p. 145-162.
Nadeau, L., and James, D.T., 2001, Preliminary note on the lithogeochem-istry and petrogenesis of intrusive rock suites from the Minipi Lake
region (NTS map area 13C/south) Grenville Province, Labrador, inCurrent Research: Newfoundland and Labrador Department of Minesand Energy, Geological Survey, Report 2001-1, p. 75-87.
Nadeau, L., and van Breemen, O., 1994, Do the 1.45-1.39 Ga MontaubanGroup and the La Bostonnais complex constitute a Grenvillian accretedterrane? Geological Association of Canada-Mineralogical Associationof Canada, Program with Abstracts, v. 19, p. A81.
——— 1998, Plutonic ages and tectonic settings of the Algonquin andMuskoka allochthons, Central Gneiss Belt, Grenville Province,Ontario: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 35, p. 1423-1438.
Nadeau, L., Brouillette, P., and Hébert, C., 1992, Geology and structuralrelationships along the east margin of the St. Maurice tectonic zone,north of Montauban, Grenville orogen, Quebec, in Current Research,Part C, Canadian Shield: Geological Survey of Canada, Paper 92-1C, p. 139-146.
——— 1999, New observations on relict volcanic features in medium gradegneisses of the Montauban Group, Grenville Province, Quebec:Geological Survey of Canada, Paper 99-1E, p. 149-160.
Nantel, S., 2003, Carte de la partie nord de la Ceinture centrale des métasédi-ments, Province de Grenville, in Cartes préliminaires en couleurs destravaux de cartographie et des études 2002-2003: Ministère desRessources naturelles du Québec; DV 2002-11, 1:100 000 map.
Nantel, S., and Pintson, H., 2002, Géologie de la Région du Lac Dieppe(31O/3): Ministère des Ressources Naturelles, Québec, RG 2001-16, 36 p.
Nantel, S., Giguère, E., and Clark, T., 2004, Géologie de la Région du LacDuplessis (31 O/06): Ministère des Ressources Naturelles, de la Fauneet des Parcs du Québec, RG 2003-01, 51 p.
Neal, H.E., 2000, Iron deposits of the Labrador Trough: Exploration andMining Geology, v. 9, p. 113-121.
Ortega, J., 2003, Rapport sur les Travaux d’Exploration effectués en 2002 -Projet Gatineau JV (1510): Ministère des Ressources Naturelles,Québec, GM 59949, 58 p.
Osborne, F.F., 1956, The Grenville region of Quebec, in Thompson, J.E.,ed., The Grenville Problem: The Royal Society of Canada, SpecialPublications, v. 1, p. 3-13.
Owen, J.V., and Greenough, J.D., 1995, Petrology of cordierite + gedritegranulite from the Grenvillian Long Range Inlier, Newfoundland:Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 32, p. 1035-1045.
Owen, J.V., Longstaffe, F.J., and Greenough, J.D., 2003, Petrology of sap-phirine granulite and associated sodic gneisses from the Indian HeadRange, Newfoundland: Lithos, v. 68, p. 91-114.
Owens, B.E., and Dymek, R.F., 2005, Rediscovery of the MattawaAnorthosite Massif, Grenville Province, Quebec: Canadian Journal ofEarth Sciences, v. 42, p. 1699-1718.
Parsons, S., Nadeau, L., Keating, P., and Chung, C.-J., 2006, Optimizing theuse of aeromagnetic data for predictive geological interpretation: Anexample from the Grenville Province, Quebec: Computers andGeosciences, v. 32, p. 565-576.
Peck, W.H., and Smith, M.S., 2005, Cordierite-gedrite rocks from theCentral Metasedimentary Belt boundary thrust zone (GrenvilleProvince, Ontario): Mesoproterozoic metavolcanic rocks with affinitiesto the Composite Arc Belt: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 42,p. 1815-1828.
Peck, W.H., De Angelis, M.T., Meredith, M.T., and Morin, E., 2005,Polymetamorphism of marbles in the Morin terrane, GrenvilleProvince, Quebec: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 42, p. 1949-1965.
Perreault, S., and Heaman, L.M., 2003, Géologie et géochronologie de laBasse-Côte-Nord (entre Chevery et Blanc Sablon) dans la provincegéologique de Grenville, in Brisebois, D., and Clark, T., eds., Géologieet Ressources Minérales de la Partie est de la Province de Grenville:Ministère des Ressources Naturelles de la Faune et des Parcs, Québec,DV 2002-03, p. 119-146.
Perreault, S., and Hébert, C., 2003, Review of Fe-Ti±V and Fe-TiP2O5±Vdeposits associated with anorthositic suites in the Grenville Province,Québec, in Duchesne, J.-C., and Korneliussen, A., eds., IlmeniteDeposits and their Geological Environment: Norges geologiske under-sokelse, Special Publication 9, p. 83-84.
Perreault, S., and Moukhsil, A., 2003, Territoire de la Province de Grenville:Ministère des Ressources naturelles, de la Faune et des Parcs, Québec,DV 2004-01, p. 45-51.
Perreault, S., Clark, T., Gobeil, A., Chevé, S., Dion, D.-J., Corriveau, L.,Nabil, H., and Lortie, P., 1997, The Cu-Ni-Co Potential of the Sept-Îles
Region: The Lac Volant showing: Ministère des Ressources Naturelles,Québec, PRO 97-03, 10 p.
Perry, C., and Raymond, D., 1996, Le Projet Nipissis de SOQUEM - IOC:un Nouveau Type de Minéralisations Cuprifère sur la Côte-Nord:Ministère des Ressources Naturelles, Québec, DV 96-02, p. 16.
Perry, C., and Roy, I., 1997, Propriété Manitou 1088-1. Rapport sur lesTravaux Menés en 1995: Ministère des Ressources Naturelles, Québec,GM-55005, 431 p.
Puffer, J.H., and Gorring, M.L., 2005, The Edison magnetite deposits in thecontext of pre-syn-and post-orogenic metallogenesis in the GrenvilleHighlands of New Jersey: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 42, p. 1735-1748.
Puffer, J.H., and Volkert, R.A., 1991, Generation of trondhjemite from par-tial melting of dacite under granulite facies conditions; an examplefrom the New Jersey Highlands, USA: Precambrian Research, v. 51, p. 115-125.
Rankin, D.W., Chiarenzelli, J.R., Drake, A.A., Jr., Goldsmith, R., Hall,L.M., Hinze, W.J., Isachen, W.J., Lidiak, E.G., McLelland, J., Mosher,S., Ratcliffe, N.M., Secor, D.T., Jr., and Whitney, P.R., 1993,Proterozoic rocks east and southeast of the Grenville front, Chapter 5 inReed, J.C., Bickford, M.E., Houston, R.S., Link, P.K., Rankin, D.W.,Sims, P.K., and Van Schmus, W.R., eds., Precambrian: ConterminousU.S.: Geological Society of America, The Geology of North America,v. C-2, p. 335-461.
Richardson, D.G., and Birkett, T.C., 1996, Carbonate-associated deposits, inEckstrand, O.R., Sinclair, W.D., and Thorpe, R.I., eds., Geology ofCanadian Mineral Deposit Types: Geological Survey of Canada,Geology of Canada, no. 8, p. 541-558.
Rivers, T., 1983, The northern margin of the Grenville Province in westernLabrador - anatomy of an ancient orogenic front: PrecambrianResearch, v. 22, p. 41-73.
——— 1997, Lithotectonic elements of the Grenville Province: review andtectonic implications: Precambrian Research, v. 86, p. 117-154.
Rivers, T., and Corrigan, D., 2000, Convergent margin on southeasternLaurentia during the Mesoproterozoic: Tectonic implications: CanadianJournal of Earth Sciences, v. 37, p. 359-383.
Rivers, T., Martignole, J., Gower, C.F., and Davidson, A., 1989, New tec-tonic divisions of the Grenville Province, southeast Canadian Shield:Tectonics, v. 8, p. 63-84.
Rivers, T., van Gool, J.A.M., and Connelly, J.N., 1993, Contrasting tectonicstyles in the northern Grenville Province: implications for the dynam-ics of orogenic fronts: Geology, v. 21, p. 1127-1130.
Rivers, T., Ketchum, J.W.F., Indares, A., and Hynes, A., 2002, The HighPressure belt in the Grenville Province: Architecture, timing, and exhu-mation: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 39, p. 867-893.
Roach, R.A., and Duffel, S., 1974, Structural analysis of the Mount Wrightmap-area, southernmost Labrador-Trough, Quebec, Canada:Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 85, p. 947-962.
Rogers, M.C., Thurston, P.C., Fyon, J.A., Kelly, R.I., and Breaks, F.W.,1995, Descriptive Mineral Deposit Models of Metallic and IndustrialDeposit Types and Related Mineral Potential Assessment Criteria:Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 5916, 241 p.
Rondenay, S., Bostock, M.G., Hearn, T.M., White, D.J., and Ellis, R.M.,2000, Lithospheric assembly and modification of the SE CanadianShield: Abitibi-Grenville teleseismic experiment: Journal ofGeophysical Research, v. 105, p. 13735-13754.
Rose, E.R., 1969, Geology of Titanium and Titaniferous Deposits ofCanada: Geological Survey of Canada, Economic Geology Report 25,177 p.
Sager-Kinsman, E.A., and Parrish, R.R., 1993, Geochronology of detritalzircons from the Elzevir and Frontenac terranes, CentralMetasedimentary Belt, Grenville Province, Ontario: Canadian Journalof Earth Sciences, v. 30, p. 465-473.
Saint-Germain, P., and Corriveau, L., 2003, Évolution magmatique etgéochimique du Complexe de gabbronorite et de monzonite deMatamec, in Brisebois, D., and Clark, T., eds., Géologie et RessourcesMinérales de la Partie est de la Province de Grenville: Ministère desRessources Naturelles de la Faune et des Parcs, Québec, DV 2002-03,p. 179-212.
Sangster, A., Gauthier, M., and Gower, C.F., 1992, Metallogeny of structuralzones, Grenville Province, northeastern North America: PrecambrianResearch, v. 58, p. 410-426.
Sangster, P.J., Laidlaw, D.A., Papertzian, V.C., Steele, K.G., Lee, C.R.,Barua, M., and Carter, T.R., 2006, Report of Activities 2005, ResidentGeologist Program, Southern Ontario Regional Resident GeologistReport: Southeastern and Southwestern Ontario Districts, Mines andMinerals Information Centre, and Petroleum Resources Centre; OntarioGeological Survey, Open File Report 6186, 77 p.
Scherrer, G., 2003, Géochimie et pétrogenèse des roches métagabbroïquesdu domaine de Natashquan, secteur oriental de la Province deGrenville, Québec: M.Sc. thesis, INRS-ETE, Québec, 150 p.
Schwerdtner, W.M., Riller, U.P., and Borowik, A., 2005, Structural testingof tectonic hypotheses by field-based analysis of distributed tangentialshear: Examples from major high strain zones in the Grenville Provinceand other parts of the southern Canadian Shield: Canadian Journal ofEarth Sciences, v. 42, p. 1927-1947.
Seeger, C.M., Nuelle, L.M., Day, W.C., Sidder, G.B., Marikos, M.A., andSmith D.C., 2001, Geologic maps and cross sections of mine levels atthe Pea Ridge Iron Mine, Washington County, Missouri: U.S.Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2353, Version1.0.
Selleck, B., McLelland, J., and Hamilton, M.A., 2004, Magmatic-hydrothermal leaching and origin of late- to post-tectonic quartz-richrocks, Adirondack Highlands, New York, in Tollo, R.P., Corriveau, L.,McLelland, J., and Bartholomew, M., eds., Proterozoic TectonicEvolution of the Grenville Orogen in North America: GeologicalSociety of America, Memoir 197, p. 379-390.
Sharma, K.N.M., 1973, Géologie de la Région du Lac Victor, Comté deDuplessis: Ministère des Richesses Naturelles, Québec, RP 607, 11 p.
Slagstad, T., Culshaw, N.G., Jamieson, R.A., and Ketchum, J.W.F., 2004,Early Mesoproterozoic tectonic history of the southwestern GrenvilleProvince, Ontario: Constraints from geochemistry and geochronologyof high-grade gneisses, in Tollo, R.P., Corriveau, L., McLelland, J., andBartholomew, M., eds., Proterozoic Tectonic Evolution of the GrenvilleOrogen in North America: Geological Society of America, Memoir197, p. 209-242.
Stanaway, K., 1996, The eastern North American titanium province—Areview: Lithology and Mineral Resources, v. 31, p. 509-517.
——— 2003, Titanium mining provinces of the world: Canadian Instituteof Mining Industry Conference and Exhibition, Montreal, TechnicalPaper, CD-ROM.
Thériault, R., Clark, T., Beaumier, M., Dion, D.J., Garneau, C., and Leduc,M., 2003, Ni-Cu-PGE Mineralizations in Quebec: Ministère desRessources Naturelles, de la Faune et des Parcs, Québec, DV 2003-06,1 map,scale 1:250 000.
Thomas, A., Blomberg, P., Jackson, V., and Finn, G., 2000, Bedrock geologymap of the Wilson Lake area (13E/SE), Labrador: Newfoundland andLabrador Department of Mines and Energy, Geological Survey, Map2000-01, scale 1:100000, Open File 013E/0061.
Thompson, J.E., 1956, Preface, in Thompson, J.E., ed., The GrenvilleProblem: Royal Society of Canada, Special Publications, v. 1, p. 3-13.
Tollo, R.P., Corriveau, L., McLelland, J., and Bartholomew, M.J., 2004,Proterozoic tectonic evolution of the Grenville orogen in NorthAmerica: An introduction, in Tollo, R.P., Corriveau, L., McLelland, J.,and Bartholomew, M., eds., Proterozoic Tectonic Evolution of theGrenville Orogen in North America: Geological Society of America,Memoir 197, p. 1-18.
Tornos, F., and Casquet, C., 2005, A new scenario for related IOCG andNi(Cu) mineralization: the relationship with giant mid-crustal maficsills, Variscan Iberian Massif: Terra Nova, v. 17, p. 236-241.
Tucker, R.D., and Gower, C.F., 1994, A U-Pb geochronological frameworkfor the Pinware terrane, Grenville Province, southeast Labrador:Journal of Geology, v. 102, p. 67-78.
Vaillancourt, C., Sproule, R.A., MacDonald, C.A., and Lesher, C.M., 2003,Investigation of Mafic-Ultramafic Intrusions in Ontario and Implicationsfor Platinum Group Element Mineralization: Operation Treasure Hunt:Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 6102, 335 p.
van Breemen, O., and Corriveau, L., 2005, U-Pb age constraints on arena-ceous and volcanic rocks of the Wakeham Group, eastern GrenvilleProvince: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 42, p. 1677-1697.
van Breemen, O., and Currie, K.L., 2004, Geology and U-Pb geochronol-ogy of the Kipawa Syenite Complex - a thrust related alkaline pluton -and adjacent rocks in the Grenville Province of western Quebec:Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 41, p. 431-455.
L. Corriveau, S. Perreault, and A. Davidson
846
Prospective Metallogenic Settings of the Grenville Province
847
van Breemen, O., and Davidson, A., 1988, Northeast extension ofProterozoic terranes of mid-continental North America: GeologicalSociety of America Bulletin, v. 100, p. 630-638.
van Breemen, O., Davidson, A., Loveridge, W.D., and Sullivan, R.W., 1986,U-Pb zircon geochronology of Grenville tectonites, granulites, andigneous precursors, Parry Sound, Ontario, in Moore, J.M., Davidson,A., and Baer A.J., eds., The Grenville Province: Geological Associationof Canada, Special Paper 31, p. 191-207.
Van Schmus, W.R., Bickford, M.E., and Turek, A., 1996, Proterozoic geol-ogy of the east-central Midcontinent basement, in van der Pluijm, B.A.,and Catacosinos, P., eds., Basement and Basins of eastern NorthAmerica: Geological Society of America, Special Paper 308, p. 7-32.
Vassiliou, A.H., and Puffer, J.H., 1985, Uranium, rare earth and iron miner-alization in pegmatite at the Bemco Mine prospect, Cranberry Lake,New Jersey, in Hausen, D.M., and Kopp, O.C., eds., Mineralogy -Applications to the Minerals Industry: New York: American Institute ofMining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Paul F. KerrMemorial Symposium Volume, p. 71-87.
Villeneuve, D., 1988, The Calumet Project, in Vallières A., ed., Gîtes métal-lifères dans le sud du Grenville - Livret-guide d’excursion: Ministère del’Énergie et des Ressources du Québec, MB 88-10, p. 35-41.
Vogel, D.C., James, R.S., and Keays, R.R., 1998, The early tectono-mag-matic evolution of the Southern Province: Implications from the AgnewIntrusion, central Ontario, Canada: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences,v. 35, p. 854-870.
Volkert, R.A., 2004a, Mesoproterozoic rocks of the New Jersey Highlands,north-central Appalachians: Petrogenesis and tectonic history, in Tollo,R.P., Corriveau, L., McLelland, J., and Bartholomew, M., eds.,Proterozoic Tectonic Evolution of the Grenville Orogen in NorthAmerica: Geological Society of America, Memoir 197, p. 1-18.
——— 2004b, Characteristics, age, geochemistry, and mineralization of apostorogenic felsic magmatic suite, New Jersey Highlands: GeologicalSociety of America, Northeastern-Southeastern Section, Tysons Corner,VA, Abstracts with Programs, v. 36, p. 51.
Volkert, R.A., Feigenson, M.D., Patino, L.C., Delaney J.S., and Drake Jr.,A.A., 2000a, Sr and Nd isotopic compositions, age and petrogenesis ofA-type granitoids of the Vernon Supersuite, New Jersey Highlands,USA: Lithos, v. 50, p. 325-347.
Volkert, R.A., Johnson, C.A., and Tamashausky, A.V., 2000b,Mesoproterozoic graphite deposits, New Jersey Highlands: Geologicand stable isotope evidence for possible algal origins: Canadian Journalof Earth Sciences, v. 37, p. 1665-1675.
Wardle, R.J., and Hall, J., 2002, Proterozoic evolution of the northeasternCanadian Shield: Lithoprobe eastern Canadian Shield onshore-offshoretransect (ECSOOT), introduction and summary, in Wardle, R.J., andHall, J., eds., Proterozoic Evolution of the northeastern CanadianShield: Lithoprobe Eastern Canadian Shield Onshore-OffshoreTransect: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 39, p. 563-567.
Wardle, R.J., Gower, C.F., Ryan, B., Nunn, G.A.G., James D.T., and Kerr,A., 1997, Geological map of Labrador: Geological Survey, Departmentof Mines and Energy, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador,Map 97-07, scale 1 : 1 000 000.
Wasteneys, H., Kamo, S., Moser, D., Krogh, T.E., Gower, C.F., and Owen,J.V., 1997, U-Pb geochronological constraints on the geological evolu-tion of the Pinware terrane and adjacent areas, Grenville Province,southeast Labrador, Canada: Precambrian Research, v. 81, p. 101-128.
Weihed, P., 2001, A review of Paleoproterozoic intrusive hosted Cu-Au-Fe-oxide deposits in northern Sweden, in Weihed, P., ed., EconomicGeology Research, Volume 1 1999-2000: Sveriges GeologiskaUndersökning, v. C-833, p. 4-32.
Wiebe, R.A., and Collins, W.J., 1998, Depositional features and strati-graphic sections in granitic plutons: Implications for the emplacementand crystallization of granitic magma: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 20, p. 1273-1289.
Williams, P.J., 1992, Metamorphosed boninitic basalts, arc tholeiites, andcryptic volcanic stratigraphy from the Elzevir Terrane of the GrenvilleProvince, Calumet mine, Quebec: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences,v. 29, p. 26-34.
Wilson, M.E., 1926, Arnprior-Quyon and Maniwaki Areas, Ontario andQuebec: Geological Survey of Canada, Memoir 136, 152 p.
Wilson, G.C., 1993, Mafic-Ultramafic Intrusions, Base-Metal Sulphides,and Platinum Group Element Potential of the Grenville Province insoutheastern Ontario: Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report,195 p.
Wodicka, N., David, J., Parent, M., Gobeil, A., and Verpaelst, P., 2003,Géochronologie U-Pb et Pb-Pb de la région de Sept-Îles - Natashquan,Province de Grenville, Moyenne-Côte-Nord, in Brisebois, D., andClark, T., eds., Géologie et Ressources Minérales de la Partie est de laProvince de Grenville: Ministère des Ressources Naturelles, de laFaune et des Parcs, Québec, DV 2002-03, p. 59-118.
Wodicka, N., Corriveau, L., and Stern, R., 2004, SHRIMP U-Pb zircongeochronology of the Bondy gneiss complex: Evidence for ca. 1.40 Gaarc magmatism and polyphase Grenvillian metamorphism in theCentral Metasedimentary Belt, Grenville Province, Quebec, in Tollo,R.P., Corriveau, L., McLelland, J., and Bartholomew, M., eds.,Proterozoic Tectonic Evolution of the Grenville Orogen in NorthAmerica: Geological Society of America, Memoir 197, p. 243-266.
Wolff, J.M., 1979, Geology of the Long Lake Area, Frontenac County:Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 5271, 174 p.
Wynne-Edwards, H.R., 1972, The Grenville Province, in Price, R.A., andDouglas, R.J.W., eds., Variations in Tectonic Styles in Canada:Geological Association of Canada, Special Paper 11, p. 263-334.
Yigit, O., and Hofstra, A.H., 2003, Lithogeochemistry of Carlin-type goldmineralization in the Gold Bar district, Battle Mountain-Eureka trend,Nevada: Ore Geology Reviews, v. 22, p. 201-224.
