Home Journals Articles Updates About
CN
image
收藏切换
Record of hydrothermal activity in the Yuhuang hydrothermal field and its implications for the Southwest Indian Ridge: evidence from sulfide chronology
收藏切换
PDF
Weifang Yang1, Chunhui Tao1, 2, *, Shili Liao1, Jin Liang1, Wei Li1, Teng Ding3, Ágata Alveirinho Dias4, Xuefeng Wang5, Lisheng Wang5
Acta Oceanologica Sinica | 2023, 42(11) : 59 - 68
Less
收藏切换
Acta Oceanologica Sinica | 2023, 42(11): 59-68
• Marine Geology •
Record of hydrothermal activity in the Yuhuang hydrothermal field and its implications for the Southwest Indian Ridge: evidence from sulfide chronology
Full
Weifang Yang1, Chunhui Tao1, 2, *, Shili Liao1, Jin Liang1, Wei Li1, Teng Ding3, Ágata Alveirinho Dias4, Xuefeng Wang5, Lisheng Wang5
Affiliations
  • 1 Key Laboratory of Submarine Geosciences, Second Institute of Oceanography, Ministry of Natural Resources, Hangzhou 310012, China
  • 2 School of Oceanography, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai 200030, China
  • 3 School of Marine Science and Engineering, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, China
  • 4 Institute of Science and Environment, University of Saint Joseph, Macao 999078, China
  • 5 Key Laboratory of Cenozoic Geology and Environment, Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100029, China
Published: 2023-11-25 doi: 10.1007/s13131-023-2287-2
Outline
收藏切换

The Yuhuang hydrothermal field (YHF) is located between the Indomed and Gallieni fracture zones near the top of the off-axis slope on the south rift wall of Segment 29 on the ultraslow Southwest Indian Ridge (SWIR). Previous studies have shown that sulfides in the YHF formed during different mineralization episodes and the YHF has the greatest potential for the formation of large-scale seafloor massive sulfide deposits. However, the sulfide chronology and hydrothermal activity of the YHF remain poorly constrained. In this study, mineralogical analyses and 230Th/U dating were performed. Hydrothermal activity may start about (35.9 ± 2.3) ka from the southwest part of the YHF and may cease about (708 ± 81) a ago from the northeast part of the YHF. The 74 nonzero chronological data from hydrothermal sulfide samples provide the first quantitative characterization of the spatial and temporal history along the SWIR. Hydrothermal activity in the SWIR has been relatively active over the past 20 ka. In contrast, between 40 ka and 100 ka, hydrothermal activity was relatively infrequently and short in duration. The maximum activity occurred at 15–11 ka, 9–7 ka, 6–0.2 ka. There was a slight positive correlation between the maximal age and estimated surface area or estimated tonnage. The minimum mass accumulation rate of YHF is about 278 t/a, which is higher than most HFs related to ultramafic systems. The ultraslow spreading SWIR has the greatest potential to form large-scale seafloor massive sulfides (SMS) deposits. The results of this study provide new insights into the metallogenic mechanism of hydrothermal sulfides along ultraslow-spreading ridges.

Southwest Indian Ridge  /  seafloor massive sulfides  /  230Th/U dating  /  hydrothermal activity  /  mass accumulation
Weifang Yang, Chunhui Tao, Shili Liao, Jin Liang, Wei Li, Teng Ding, Ágata Alveirinho Dias, Xuefeng Wang, Lisheng Wang. Record of hydrothermal activity in the Yuhuang hydrothermal field and its implications for the Southwest Indian Ridge: evidence from sulfide chronology[J]. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 2023 , 42 (11) : 59 -68 . DOI: 10.1007/s13131-023-2287-2
Full Text
Less
1 Introduction
Less
Polymetallic sulfides associated with submarine hydrothermal activity are rich in cooper (Cu), zinc (Zn), gold (Au), silver (Ag), cobalt (Co) and other elements, and represent a potential mineral resource. It is estimated that the total amount of sulfide in the submarine neovolcanic zones in the global oceans may reach 600 million tons and contain about 30 million tons of Cu and Zn (Hannington et al., 2011). In total, about 721 sites with seafloor hydrothermal venting at the seafloor have been discovered, including 666 active vent fields and 55 inactive vent fields. Among them, 404 sites are located along the mid-ocean ridges while 71 are at ultra-slow spreading midocean ridges (www.interridge.com).
The Southwest Indian Ridge (SWIR) is characterized by a heterogeneous magma supply along the ridge axis, which is composed alternately of magmatic-enriched and magmatic-barren Segments. The magmatic-barren segments often develop detachment faults and oceanic core complexes (Cannat et al., 1999; Sauter et al., 2001; Tao et al., 2012, 2020; Liu and Buck, 2018). Since 2007, many hydrothermal fields (HFs) have been discovered in the SWIR, including Longqi, Duanqiao, Yuhuang, Suye, Tianzuo and Tiancheng (Tao et al., 2012; Liao et al., 2018, 2022; Ding et al., 2021; Chen et al., 2018). Recent studies have shown that ultraslow spreading mid-ocean ridges also have the potential to form large-scale sulfide deposits (Pedersen et al., 2010; Tao et al., 2012; Yu et al., 2021). For example, the ore-forming scale of Loki’s Castle HF on the Arctic mid-ocean ridge is equivalent to the super-large sulfide deposits in the Trans-Atlantic Geotraverse (TAG) hydrothermal field in the Mid-Atlantic Ridge (Pedersen et al., 2010). The Yuhuang hydrothermal field (YHF) located on the south rift wall of segment 29 on the SWIR, is a detachment faulting hydrothermal system (Liao et al., 2018; Zhu et al., 2020a). Its estimated total resources are 10.6 × 106 t which may be considered as one of the largest seafloor massive sulfides (SMS) deposits (Yu et al., 2021). Sulfide geochemistry, sulfur and zinc isotope features of YHF have been studied and described different mineralization episodes that may form the different types of sulfides (Liao et al., 2018, 2019). However, the sulfide chronology and the hydrothermal activity of YHF remain poorly constrained compared with other HFs on the SWIR (e.g., Longqi, Duanqiao and Mt. Jourdanne) (Liang et al., 2018; Yang et al., 2017; Münch et al., 2001).
Chronology research can reveal multi-stage formation and superposition processes of ore bodies, as well as the formation and evolution history of sulfides, their growth and hydrothermal fluid activities more accurately (Lalou and Brichet,1982, 1987; Lalou et al., 1993, 1996; Kuznetsov et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2012; Jamieson et al., 2014). Limited chronological data on sulfides indicate that the maximum lifespan of a sulfide deposit is usually 100 000 a (Lalou et al., 1990, 1995; Cherkashov et al., 2010). In this study, mineralogical and chronological analyses were performed on four representative sulfides. We used the 230Th/U dating method to constrain the sulfide formation history and the hydrothermal activity of YHF, and we coupled results of the estimated deposits tonnage to determine the accumulated rate of the sulfide deposits. We also established the relationship between the geological data and the surface area and resources. The results of this study provided new insights into the metallogenic mechanism of hydrothermal sulfides along ultra-slow spreading ridges.
2 Geological setting
Less
As one of the major global plate boundaries, the SWIR separates the African and Antarctic plates, running from the Bouvet Triple Junction (55°S, 0°40′E) to the Rodrigues Triple Junction (25°30′S, 70°E) (Bach et al., 2002; Meyzen et al., 2003) (Fig. 1a). The SWIR has a full spreading rate of 14–18 mm/a, which varies slightly along the axial direction from N18°E to N0°E, which is a typical ultraslow spreading mid-ocean ridge (Dick et al., 2003). The average crust thickness of the SWIR is 4 km, which is much thinner than the average ocean crust thickness, and characterized by a lack of magmatic supply (Baker and German, 2004; Sauter and Cannat, 2010).
The YHF (37.94°S, 49.26°E) is located between the Indomed and Gallieni fracture zones near the top of the off-axis slope on the south rift wall of Segment 29 at a water depth of 1 400−1 900 m (Cannat et al., 1999; Sauter et al., 2001) (Fig. 1b). It is the shallowest mineralized area found in the SWIR. The YHF was first discovered in 2010 during the DY115-21 cruise R/V Dayangyihao (Han et al., 2010). Deep-tow camera, TV-grab sampling, and self-potential surveys have been conducted in 2014–2021 during the DY34, DY39, DY40, DY43, DY52, DY58 and DY65 cruises. It is suggested the YH mineralization area can be divided into two sulfide accumulation areas including the northeast sulfide deposits (NES) and the southwest sulfide deposits (SWS). The NES area is relatively small compared to the SWS (Liao et al., 2018; Yu et al., 2021) (Fig. 1c). Samples of massive sulfides, sulfide rich chimneys, basalts, ultramafic rocks and hydrothermal sediments were obtained in this area by TV-grab sampling and shallow drilling by a robotic lander-type seafloor drilling rig (Yu et al., 2021).
3 Samples and analytical methods
Less
3.1 Sample collection and description
The sulfide samples used in this study were collected by a TV grab during the DY115-21 and DY125-34 cruises of R/V Dayangyihao. Samples 34-TVG22-1 and 34-TVG22-2 were collected from the SWS, whereas samples 21-TVG22-1 and 34-TVG23-4 were recovered from the NES. All the sulfides were recovered at water depths between 1 440 m and 1 560 m (Fig. 1c). The pyritic massive sulfide sample (21-TVG22-3) has obvious three layers: pyrite-marcasite-sphalerite, sphalerite-pyrite and chalcopyrite-sphalerite (Fig. 2a). The silicified sulfide rich sample (34-TVG22-1) consists two parts: pyrite-sphalerite-marcasite-silicon and pyrite-marcasite-silicon (Fig. 2b). A small number of cellular fluid channels can also be seen inside the sample. The sphalerite-rich massive sulfide sample (34-TVG22-2) consists of a pyrite crust and a sphalerite core (Fig. 2c). Sample 34-TVG23-4 is a section of a silicified sulfide rich chimney (Fig. 2d).
3.2 Analytical methods
Mineral and textural examinations were described from polished thin sections using a reflected and transmitted light polarizing microscope (Zeiss AXIO Scope A1) at the Key Laboratory of Submarine Geosciences (Ministry of Natural Resources, Hangzhou, China).
Three whole-rock samples and thirteen micro-drilling samples were selected for 230Th/U dating. The outer brown oxidation layers of the three whole-rock samples have been removed. And then the samples have been washed several times by de-ionized water in an ultrasonic bath. After drying, the samples were milled using a ball mill (mixer mill MM 200) for further analyses. The micro-drilling was carried out by a MICRODRILL SYSTEM at the State Key Laboratory of Ore Deposit Geochemistry, Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences. U and Th chemical separations and the mass spectrometry analyses were performed at the U-series chronology lab of Institute of Geology and Geophysics, (IGG) Chinese Academy of Sciences . A triple-spike (229Th-233U–236U) isotope dilution method was employed to determine U/Th isotopic ratios and correct the instrumental fractionation. The chemical separation procedures were similar to those described in Yang et al. (2017) and Wang et al. (2021). Briefly, 20–50 mg samples were total digested with concentrated acid (HF/HNO3/HCl). Then, the U and Th were purified and separated with 0.5 mL AG1-X8 resin. Finally, U and Th isotopes were analyzed using a Thermo Fisher NEPTUNE plus multi-collector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (MC-ICP-MS) at IGG. The sample solution was introduced using a Polyfluoroalkoxy 50 μL/min nebulizer on an Aridus II desolvating nebulizer system. The instrumental parameters and procedures are described in Wang et al. (2021). 230Th ages were calculated via equations presented in Edwards et al. (1987), Cheng et al. (2013), Yang et al. (2017) and Wang et al. (2021). A 230Th age standard sample (GBW04412) was analyzed to verify the accuracy and precision of 230Th/U dating. The precision of the method for 230Th/U dating was better than 95%. All the results are within 2σ uncertainty, unless indicated. The chemical blanks for the entire process were 5–12 pg for 238U, 0.5–1 fg for 230Th and 3–5 fg for 232Th, which were negligible for dating quaternary sulfide samples.
4 Results
Less
4.1 Minerals
The main mineral composition of pyritic massive sulfide sample (21-TVG22-3) consisted of pyrite (20%–30%), sphalerite (15%–20%) and chalcopyrite (8%–12%). Sphalerite coexists with the chalcopyrite (Fig. 3a). Pyrrhotite was rare in YHF sulfide samples (3%–5%), it is usually replaced by chalcopyrite (Fig. 3a). Pyrite was the most abundant sulfide phase in the silicified sulfide rich sample (34-TVG22-1). Based on the morphology, pyrite can be subdivided in three types: grained pyrite (Py1), coarse-grained pyrite (Py2), and colloform pyrite (Py3) (Fig. 3b). Pyrite generally coexisted with chalcopyrite and marcasite, which was often replaced by chalcopyrite (Figs 3c, d). Bornite often exhibited exsolution texture in chalcopyrite (Fig. 3d).
Sphalerite and pyrite were the main minerals in the sphalerite-rich massive sulfide sample (34-TVG22-2) while the chalcopyrite and bornite are less. The sphalerite exhibited two generations, early Sph1 and late Sph2 that is replaced by chalcopyrite and pyrite (Fig. 3e). The replacement of chalcopyrite with sphalerite was also observed (Figs 3e, f). Chalcopyrite has a bornite solid solution and growth edge (Figs 3e, f). The silicified sulfide rich chimney (34-TVG23-4) from the bottom part of a silicified chimney grew on basalt. Pyrite was often presented as a veined form in amorphous silicon and often replaced by sphalerite (Fig. 3g). Sphalerite had many generations and presented as banded aggregates (Fig. 3h). In addition, sphalerite was sometimes replaced by pyrite (Fig. 3i).
4.2 U-Th isotope ratios and U-Th ages
The U–Th isotope systematics of the samples are presented in Table 1. The U concentrations ranged from 35.1 × 10–9 to 39 847 × 10–9 for massive sulfide samples, with an average of 3 126.2 × 10–9. The Th concentrations ranged from 276 × 10–12 to 2 723 × 10–12, with an average of 685.3 × 10–12. The U content was very low in subsamples 21-TVG22-3-4 (35.1 × 10–9) and 34-TVG 22-2-4 (37 × 10–9), but extremely high in subsample 21VII-TVG22-1. Also, most subsamples showed a significant positive correlation between U and Th (Fig. 4a). Notably, the 230Th/232Th ratios of most samples had a lower value, ranging from 19 ×10−6 to 3692 ×10−6 which the 230Th/232Th ratio of 21VII-TVG22-1 can reach up to 198 929.6 ×10−6. Most of the measured δ234U values range between 94 ± 24.4 and 150.5 ± 2.4, while the corrected δ234Uinitial range between 104 ± 27 and 156 ± 2 (Table 1). Most of the δ234Uinitial values are within the known range of seawater (149–155) and vent fluid (92–146) (Chen et al., 1986; Ludwig et al., 2011). The corrected 230Th age of most subsamples from the massive sulfide 21-TVG22, 34-TVG23 and 34-TVG22 varied from (708 ± 81) a to (9 399 ± 374) a, (7 448 ± 59) a to (9 148 ± 59) a and (11 549 ± 59) a to (35 974 ± 2 312) a, respectively (Table 1). However, there was no systematic relationship between the 232Th, 238U, δ234Uinitial and the sample ages (Figs 4b–d).
5 Discussion
Less
5.1 Temporal evolution of hydrothermal activity in the YHF
Complete geochronological data of sulfides from the YHF are given in Table 1. The oldest sulfide age was (35 974 ± 2 312) a and the sample originated from the southwest part, whereas the youngest sulfide (708 ± 81) a was from the northeast part of the YHF. Subsamples from the NES ranged from (708 ± 81) a to (9 418 ± 374) a while subsamples from the SWS ranged from (11 569 ± 59) a to (35 974 ± 2 312) a, demonstrating that NES sulfides are younger than SWS sulfides (Fig. 5a). Thus, it appears that mineralization in the YHF has shown spatial migration, progressing from the southwest towards the northeast. These results are consistent with sulfide Zn isotopes, which show significantly different values between the SWS and NES (Liao et al., 2019). This indicates that they are probably products of separate mineralization phases. The silicified sulfide-rich NES sample lacked characteristics for fluid venting and no active hydrothermal vents have been discovered in the SWS. All this evidence suggests that hydrothermal activity has likely ceased in these areas (Liao et al., 2019; Yu, 2022).
A preliminary data analysis suggests that hydrothermal activity may start about (35.9 ± 2.3) ka from the southwest part of the YHF and extended to the northeastern area by about (9.4 ± 0.4) ka. Hydrothermal activity likely ceased about (708 ± 81) a ago. The different temporal scale may represent the presence of hydrothermal activity during this period (Fig. 5b). However, because of the small dataset, it is not possible to more precisely narrow down the active hydrothermal periods. Additionally, it is not possible to determine whether the venting was episodic or continuous from (35.9 ± 2.3) ka to (708 ± 81) a. The sulfur isotopes of the YHF sulfides are highly variable (−1.37‰ to 8.73‰), which may be related to the multi-stage hydrothermal activities (Liao et al., 2018). In the study area, both ultramafic rocks and basalts were exposed, indicating that detachment faults may be the main factor controlling hydrothermal activity in the YHF (Liao et al., 2018; Zhu et al., 2020b).
5.2 Sulfide chronology along the SWIR
From west to east along the SWIR, there are numerous HFs such as Yuhuang, Longqi, Duanqiao, Tianzuo, Mt. Jourdanne. In additional to the YHF and Tianzuo HF, we also collected fifty-six sulfide ages from Longqi, Duanqiao and Mt. Jourdanne HFs that has been reported so far (Yang et al., 2017; Liang et al., 2018; Münch et al., 2001). In total, these 74 nonzero chronological data from hydrothermal sulfide samples provide the first quantitative characterization of the spatial and temporal history along the SWIR (Fig. 6). Compared with Longqi, Duanqiao and Mt. Jourdanne, the sulfide formation in the YHF is relatively young. The only one dating result from the Tianzuo HF shows that the sulfide formation age is (54.3 ± 0.2) ka. Observations of significantly weathered sulfide and the presence of a thick sediment layer suggest that hydrothermal activity of Tianzuo HF ceased a long time ago (Chen et al., 2018). As a result of limited data from the Tianzuo HF, more samples are needed to expand our knowledge in this area.
The SWIR sulfide data indicate that hydrothermal events have been distributed unevenly through the time interval from 100 ka to 0.2 ka (Münch et al., 2001; Yang et al., 2017; Liang et al., 2018). Hydrothermal events in the SWIR demonstrate that over the past 20 ka, hydrothermal activity in the SWIR has been relatively active. In contrast, between 40 ka and 100 ka, hydrothermal activity was relatively infrequent and short in duration. The maximum activity occurred at 15–11 ka, 9–7 ka and 6–0.2 ka (Fig. 7). The 14C dating of sediment cores in Longqi and Tianzuo HFs suggests that they have been affected by hydrothermal activity at ~8 ka and >45 ka, respectively (Huang, 2021). The accumulation and sediment redistribution of contourite drift have occurred throughout the last 40 ka of sediment deposition in the Southeast Indian Ridge (Dezileau et al., 2000).
YHF can be classified as the off-axis, detachment fault type. Longqi HF exhibits high-temperature hydrothermal vents and is associated with a major detachment fault system (Tao et al., 2012, 2020). The Duanqiao and Mt. Jourdanne HFs are typical local strong magma supply mineralization areas along the ridge axis (Tao et al., 2012; Yang et al., 2023; Münch et al., 2001; Nayak et al., 2014). Tianzuo HF is close to a non-transform discontinuity and far from the thermal activity controlled by the detachment fault system (Ding et al., 2021, Chen et al., 2018, Cao et al., 2021). Age data from all of the HFs indicate that hydrothermal activity lasted for thousands or even tens of thousands of years. The duration of this activity may provide favorable conditions for the formation of large sulfide deposits on the seafloor (Lalou et al., 1995; Jamieson et al., 2014; German et al., 2016).
5.3 Correlation between the age, surface area and resource of hydrothermal sulfides along the mid-ocean ridge
Previous studies have shown that time is crucial for the formation of large-scale ore deposits and the distribution scale of hydrothermal sulfide deposits along a mid-ocean ridge is closely related to the spreading rate of that ridge (Fouquet, 1997; Hannington et al., 2005; Cherkashov et al., 2017). The fast-spreading mid-ocean ridge is affected by frequent magmatic and tectonic processes and the duration of hydrothermal activity is short, so that the distribution area of sulfide formed by a magma chamber is often small (Fouquet, 1997; Hannington et al., 2011). In contrast, sulfide deposits formed along a slow-spreading mid-ocean ridge are large because of the long duration of hydrothermal activity (Petersen and Hein, 2013). We added the maximal ages and size of the ultraslow-spreading SWIR to available data of fast, intermediate, and slow-spreading ridges (Fig. 8). Compared with fast, intermediate, and slow-spreading ridges, the sulfide ages from the SWIR are relatively old. Hydrothermal fields, such as Yuhuang, Duanqiao and Tianzuo, are large and have good resource potential whereas the Mt. Jourdanne HF is small in scale and resource (Figs 8a, b). There was a slight positive correlation between the maximal age and estimated surface areas (n = 26, R2 = 0.189) (Fig. 8a) as well as a weak positive correlation between the maximal age and estimated tonnage (n = 23, R2 = 0.101) (Fig. 8b). Statistical analyses of maximal age and estimated surface area showed a relatively good positive correlation for HFs related to ultramafic-hosted systems (n = 13, R2 = 0.3933) while there was no correlation for basalt-hosted HFs (Fig. 8a). The relationships between estimated tonnage and the maximal age showed similar characteristics (Fig. 8b). Sulfide mineralization related to basalts typically form mounds, while sulfide mineralization with ultramafic rocks form relatively flat deposits (Fouquet et al., 2010). When using the same parameters, ultramafic-related deposits may provide a better approximation of the volume/resource available than basalt-related deposits (Cherkashov et al., 2017).
Studies have shown that the estimated size of the YHF is 10 650 000–45 100 000 t, which is one of the largest SMS deposits worldwide (Yu et al., 2021). According to the maximal age and the minimum estimated size, the minimum mass accumulation rate of the YHF is about 278 t/a. This is higher than the accumulation rates related to most ultramafic HFs (Jamieson et al., 2014). Using the minimum mass accumulation rate, the sulfide resources of Duanqiao HF is estimated at 23 574 400 t. TAG mounds can contribute to a substantial accumulation of hydrothermal material (~29 Mt), which is comparable to other modern seafloor vent fields (Graber et al., 2020). These results further confirm that the ultraslow-spreading SWIR has a great potential to form large-scale SMS deposits. The YHF is located in the footwall of a detachment fault associated with basalts and ultramafic rocks which this is different from other ultraslow-spreading areas in its tectonic complexity (Liao et al., 2018, 2019). As a result of this complex geology, sulfide ore bodies in the YHF generally accumulated over long term in relatively small areas through multiple periods of hydrothermal activities. Serpentinization with deep ultramafic rocks provides a continuous heat source for the hydrothermal cycle, and accompanied by long-term hydrothermal activities, which makes the YHF more conducive to sulfide accumulation.
6 Conclusions
Less
(1) The sulfides from the NES are younger than the SWS. Hydrothermal activity may start about (35.9 ± 2.3) ka from the southwest part of the YHF and may cease about (708 ± 81) ka ago from the northeast part of the YHF. The mineralization in the YHF shows spatial migration with hydrothermal mineralization first occurring in the southwest.
(2) Hydrothermal activity in the SWIR has been relatively active over the past 20 ka, while during 40–100 ka, hydrothermal activity was relatively infrequent and short in duration. The maximum activity occurred at 15–11 ka, 9–7 ka and 6–0.2 ka.
(3) Hydrothermal fields, such as Yuhuang, Duanqiao and Tianzuo, are large and have good resource potential whereas the Mt. Jourdanne HF is small in scale and resource. Statistical analyses of maximal age and estimated surface area or tonnage show a relatively good positive correlation for HFs related to ultramafic-hosted systems while there was no correlation for basalt-hosted HFs.
(4) The minimum mass accumulation rate in the YHF was about 278 t/a, which is higher than most HFs related to ultramafic systems. Due to the complex geological structure of the YHF, sulfide ore bodies generally accumulate over longer periods of time in relatively small areas through multiple intervals of hydrothermal activity. Thus, the ultraslow spreading SWIR has a great potential to form large-scale SMS deposits.
Acknowledgements
Less
We thank the captains, crew and the science parties who participated the DY115-21, DY125-34 cruises on R/V Dayangyihao. We are also grateful to three anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions.
Funding
Less
  • The National Key R&D Program of China under contract No. 2022YFE0140200; the National Natural Science Foundation of China under contract Nos 42127807 and 42006074; the China Ocean Mineral Resources R&D Association Project under contract Nos DY135-S1-1-02 and DY135-S1-1-01;the Macao Science and Technology Development Fund under contract No. FDCT-002/2018/A1.
References
Less
Bach W, Banerjee N R, Dick H J B, et al. 2002. Discovery of ancient and active hydrothermal systems along the ultra-slow spreading Southwest Indian Ridge 10–16°E. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 3(7): 1–14,
Baker E T, German C R. 2004. On the global distribution of hydrothermal vent fields. In: German C R, Lin J, Parson L M, eds. Mid-Ocean Ridges: Hydrothermal Interactions Between the Lithosphere and Oceans. Washington: AGU, 245–266
Cannat M, Rommevaux-Jestin C, Sauter D, et al. 1999. Formation of the axial relief at the very slow spreading Southwest Indian Ridge (49° to 69°E). Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 104(B10): 22825–22843, doi: 10.1029/1999jb900195
Cao Hong, Sun Zhilei, Jiang Zike, et al. 2021. Source origin and ore-controlling factors of hydrothermal sulfides from the Tianzuo hydrothermal field, Southwest Indian Ridge. Ore Geology Reviews, 134: 104168, doi: 10.1016/j.oregeorev.2021.104168
Chen Jie, Tao Chunhui, Liang Jin, et al. 2018. Newly discovered hydrothermal fields along the ultraslow-spreading Southwest Indian Ridge around 63°E. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 37(11): 61–67, doi: 10.1007/s13131-018-1333-y
Chen J H, Wasserburg G J, von Damm K L, et al. 1986. The U–Th–Pb systematics in hot springs on the East Pacific Rise at 21°N and Guaymas Basin. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 50(11): 2467–2479, doi: 10.1016/0016-7037(86)90030-x
Cheng Hai, Edwards R L, Shen Chuanchou, et al. 2013. Improvements in 230Th dating, 230Th and 234U half-life values, and U–Th isotopic measurements by multi-collector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 371–372: 82–91,
Cherkashov G, Kuznetsov V, Kuksa K, et al. 2017. Sulfide geochronology along the Northern Equatorial Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Ore Geology Reviews, 87: 147–154, doi: 10.1016/j.oregeorev.2016.10.015
Cherkashov G, Poroshina I, Stepanova T, et al. 2010. Seafloor massive sulfides from the northern equatorial Mid-Atlantic Ridge: new discoveries and perspectives. Marine Georesources & Geotechnology, 28(3): 222–239, doi: 10.1080/1064119X.2010.483308
Dezileau L, Bareille G, Reyss J L, et al. 2000. Evidence for strong sediment redistribution by bottom currents along the Southeast Indian Ridge. Deep-Sea Research Part I, 47(10): 1899–1936, doi: 10.1016/S0967-0637(00)00008-X
Dick H J B, Lin Jian, Schouten H. 2003. An ultraslow-spreading class of ocean ridge. Nature, 426(6965): 405–412, doi: 10.1038/nature02128
Ding Teng, Tao Chunhui, Dias Á A, et al. 2021. Sulfur isotopic compositions of sulfides along the Southwest Indian Ridge: implications for mineralization in ultramafic rocks. Mineralium Deposita, 56(6): 991–1006, doi: 10.1007/s00126-020-01025-0
Edwards R L, Chen James H, Ku Teh-Lung, et al. 1987. Precise timing of the last interglacial period from mass spectrometric determination of thorium-230 in corals. Science, 236(4808): 1547–1553, doi: 10.1126/science.236.4808.1547
Fouquet Y. 1997. Where are the large hydrothermal sulphide deposits in the oceans?. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 355(1723): 427–441
Fouquet Y, Cambon P, Etoubleau J, et al. 2010. Geodiversity of hydrothermal processes along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge and ultramafic-hosted mineralization: A new type of oceanic Cu-Zn-Co-Au volcanogenic massive sulfide deposit. American Geophysical Union (AGU). 321–366,
German C R, Petersen S, Hannington M D. 2016. Hydrothermal exploration of mid-ocean ridges: where might the largest sulfide deposits be forming?. Chemical Geology, 420: 114–126,
Graber S, Petersen S, Yeo I, et al. 2020. Structural control, evolution, and accumulation rates of massive sulfides in the TAG hydrothermal field. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 21(9): e2020GC009185,
Han Xiqiu, Wu Guanghai, Cui Ruyong, et al. 2010. Discovery of a hydrothermal sulfide deposit on the Southwest Indian Ridge at 49.2°E. In: Proceedings of the AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, San Francisco, CA, USA, 13–17 December 2010. Washington, DC, USA: American Geophysical Union, p, OS21C–1531
Hannington M D, De Ronde C E J, Petersen S. 2005. Sea-floor tectonics and submarine hydrothermal systems. In: Hedenquist J W, Thompson J F H, Goldfarb R J, et al. , eds. One Hundredth Anniversary Volume. Littelton, Colorado, USA: Society of Economic Geologists, 111–141,
Hannington M D, Galley A G, Herzig P M, et al. 1998. Comparison of the TAG mound and stockwork complex with Cyprus-type massive sulfide deposits. In: Herzig P M, Humphris S E, Miller D J, et al. , eds. Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results. San Antonio, Texas: Texas A & M University, 158: 389–415,
Hannington M, Jamieson J, Monecke T, et al. 2011. The abundance of seafloor massive sulfide deposits. Geology, 39(12): 1155–1158, doi: 10.1130/G32468.1
Huang Yongjin. 2021. Study on hydrothermal sedimentary records near the hydrothermal field of mafic and ultramafic rocks: a case study from Longqi and Tianzuo fields in the Southwest Indian Ridge (in Chinese)[dissertation]. Hangzhou: Second Institute of Oceanography, Ministry of Natural Resources
Jamieson J W, Clague D A, Hannington M D. 2014. Hydrothermal sulfide accumulation along the Endeavour Segment, Juan de Fuca Ridge. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 395: 136–148,
Jamieson J W, Hannington M D, Clague D A, et al. 2013. Sulfide geochronology along the Endeavour Segment of the Juan de Fuca Ridge. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 14(7): 2084–2099,
Kuznetsov V, Maksimov F, Zheleznov A, et al. 2011. 230Th/U chronology of ore formation within the semyenov hydrothermal district (13°31′N) at the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Geochronometria, 38(1): 72–76, doi: 10.2478/s13386-011-0001-1
Kuznetsov V, Tabuns E, Kuksa K, et al. 2015. The oldest seafloor massive sulfide deposits at the Mid-Atlantic Ridge: 230Th/U chronology and composition. Geochronometria, 42(1): 100–106, doi: 10.1515/geochr-2015-0009
Lalou C, Brichet E. 1982. Ages and implications of East Pacific Rise sulphide deposits 21°N. Nature, 300(5888): 169–171, doi: 10.1038/300169a0
Lalou C, Brichet E. 1987. On the isotopic chronology of submarine hydrothermal deposits. Chemical Geology: Isotope Geoscience Section, 65(3–4): 197–207,
Lalou C, Brichet E, Hekinian R. 1985. Age dating of sulfide deposits from axial and off-axial structures on the East Pacific Rise near 12°50′N. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 75(1): 59–71, doi: 10.1016/0012-821X(85)90050-0
Lalou C, Münch U, Halbach P, et al. 1998. Radiochronological investigation of hydrothermal deposits from the MESO zone, Central Indian Ridge. Marine Geology, 149(1–4): 243–254,
Lalou C, Reyss J L, Brichet E, et al. 1993. New age data for Mid-Atlantic Ridge hydrothermal sites: TAG and Snakepit chronology revisited. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 98(B6): 9705–9713, doi: 10.1029/92jb01898
Lalou C, Reyss J L, Brichet E, et al. 1995. Hydrothermal activity on a 105-year scale at a slow-spreading ridge, TAG hydrothermal field, Mid-Atlantic Ridge 26°N. Journal of Geophysical Research, 100(B9): 17855–17862, doi: 10.1029/95JB01858
Lalou C, Reyss J L, Brichet E, et al. 1996. Initial chronology of a recently discovered hydrothermal field at 14°45′N, Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 144(3–4): 483–490,
Lalou C, Thompson G, Arnold M, et al. 1990. Geochronology of TAG and Snakepit hydrothermal fields, Mid-Atlantic Ridge: witness to a long and complex hydrothermal history. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 97(1–2): 113–128,
Liang Jin, Tao Chunhui, Yang Weifang, et al. 2018. 230Th/238U dating of sulfide chimneys in the Longqi-1 hydrothermal field, Southwest Indian Ridge. Acta Geologica Sinica (English Edition), 92(S2): 77–78, doi: 10.1111/1755-6724.14202
Liao Shili, Tao Chunhui, Jamieson J W, et al. 2022. Oxidizing fluids associated with detachment hosted hydrothermal systems: example from the Suye hydrothermal field on the ultraslow-spreading Southwest Indian Ridge. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 328: 19–36, doi: 10.1016/j.gca.2022.04.025
Liao Shili, Tao Chunhui, Li Huaiming, et al. 2018. Bulk geochemistry, sulfur isotope characteristics of the Yuhuang-1 hydrothermal field on the ultraslow-spreading Southwest Indian Ridge. Ore Geology Review, 96: 13–27, doi: 10.1016/j.oregeorev.2018.04.007
Liao Shili, Tao Chunhui, Zhu Chuanwei, et al. 2019. Two episodes of sulfide mineralization at the Yuhuang-1 hydrothermal field on the Southwest Indian Ridge: Insight from Zn isotopes. Chemical Geology, 507: 54–63, doi: 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2018.12.037
Liu Zhonglan, Buck W R. 2018. Magmatic controls on axial relief and faulting at mid-ocean ridges. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 491: 226–237, doi: 10.1016/j.jpgl.2018.03.045
Ludwig K A, Shen Chuanzhou, Kelley D S, et al. 2011. U-Th systematics and 230Th ages of carbonate chimneys at the lost city hydrothermal field. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 75(7): 1869–1888, doi: 10.1016/j.gca.2011.01.008
Meyzen C M, Toplis M J, Humler E, et al. 2003. A discontinuity in mantle composition beneath the Southwest Indian Ridge. Nature, 421(6924): 731–733, doi: 10.1038/nature01424
Münch U, Lalou C, Halbach P, et al. 2001. Relict hydrothermal events along the super-slow Southwest Indian spreading ridge near 63°56′E-mineralogy, chemistry and chronology of sulfide samples. Chemical Geology, 177(3–4): 341–349,
Murton B J, Lehrmann B, Dutrieux A M, et al. 2019. Geological fate of seafloor massive sulphides at the TAG hydrothermal field (Mid-Atlantic Ridge). Ore Geology Review, 107: 903–925, doi: 10.1016/j.oregeorev.2019.03.005
Musatov A E, Cherkashov G A. 2020. Influence of global glaciation on the origin of hydrothermal activity within the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Oceanology, 60(3): 405–411, doi: 10.1134/S0001437020030066
Nayak B, Halbach P, Pracejus B, et al. 2014. Massive sulfides of Mount Jourdanne along the super-slow spreading Southwest Indian Ridge and their genesis. Ore Geology Reviews, 63: 115–128, doi: 10.1016/j.oregeorev.2014.05.004
Pedersen R B, Rapp H T, Thorseth I H, et al. 2010. Discovery of a black smoker vent field and vent fauna at the Arctic Mid-Ocean Ridge. Nature Communications, 1(1): 126, doi: 10.1038/NCOMMS1124
Petersen S, Hein J R. 2013. Deep Sea Minerals: Sea-Floor Massive Sulphides; A Physical, Biological, Environmental, and Technical Review. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, GRID-Arendal, Chapter1: 7–18.
Sánchez-Mora D, Jamieson J, Cannat M, et al. 2022. Age and rate of accumulation of metal-rich hydrothermal deposits on the seafloor: the lucky strike vent field, Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 127(6): e2022JB024031, doi: 10.1029/2022JB024031
Sauter D, Cannat M. 2010. The ultraslow spreading Southwest Indian Ridge. In: Rona P A, Devey C W, Dyment J, et al., Eds. Diversity of Hydrothermal Systems on Slow Spreading Ocean Ridges. Washington: AGU, 153–173,
Sauter D, Patriat P, Rommevaux-Jestin C, et al. 2001. The Southwest Indian Ridge between 49°15′ E and 57°E: focused accretion and magma redistribution. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 192(3): 303–317, doi: 10.1016/s0012-821x(01)00455-1
Tao Chunhui, Lin Jian, Guo Shiqin, et al. 2012. First active hydrothermal vents on an ultraslow-spreading center: Southwest Indian Ridge. Geology, 40(1): 47–50, doi: 10.1130/G32389.1
Tao Chunhui, Seyfried W E Jr, Lowell R P, et al. 2020. Deep high-temperature hydrothermal circulation in a detachment faulting system on the ultra-slow spreading ridge. Nature Communication, 11(1): 1300, doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-15062-w
Wang Yejian, Han Xiqiu, Jin Xionglong, et al. 2012. Hydrothermal activity events at Kairei field, Central Indian Ridge 25°S. Resource Geology, 62(2): 208–214, doi: 10.1111/j.1751-3928.2012.00189.x
Wang Lisheng, Sun Zhilei, Cao Hong, et al. 2021. A new method for the U-Th dating of a carbonate chimney deposited during the Last Glaciation in the northern Okinawa Trough, East China Sea. Quaternary Geochronology, 66: 101199, doi: 10.1016/j.quageo.2021.101199
Yang Weifang, Liao Shili, Dias Á A, et al. 2023. Geochemistry, sulfur and lead isotopic composition of hydrothermal sulfide from the Duanqiao hydrothermal field on the Southwest Indian Ridge: implications for ore genesis. International Geology Review, 65(6): 883–899, doi: 10.1080/00206814.2022.2081937
Yang Weifang, Tao Chunhui, Li Huaiming, et al. 2017. 230Th/238U dating of hydrothermal sulfides from Duanqiao hydrothermal field, Southwest Indian Ridge. Marine Geophysical Research, 38(1–2): 71–83
You C F, Bickle M J. 1998. Evolution of an active sea-floor massive sulphide deposit. Nature, 394(6694): 668–671, doi: 10.1038/29279
Yu Junyu. 2022. Enrichment and migration of ore-forming elements in Yuhuang-1 hydrothermal field at ultraslow-spreading Southwest Indian Ridge (in Chinese)[dissertation]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University
Yu Junyu, Tao Chunhui, Liao Shili, et al. 2021. Resource estimation of the sulfide-rich deposits of the Yuhuang-1 hydrothermal field on the ultraslow-spreading Southwest Indian Ridge. Ore Geology Reviews, 134: 104169, doi: 10.1016/j.oregeorev.2021.104169
Zhu Zhongmin, Tao Chunhui, Shen Jinsong, et al. 2020a. Self-potential tomography of a deep-sea polymetallic sulfide deposit on Southwest Indian Ridge. Journal of Geophysical Research:Solid Earth, 125(11): e2020JB019738, doi: 10.1029/2020JB019738
Zhu Chuanwei, Tao Chunhui, Yin Runsheng, et al. 2020b. Seawater versus mantle sources of mercury in sulfide-rich seafloor hydrothermal systems, Southwest Indian Ridge. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 281: 91–101, doi: 10.1016/j.gca.2020.05.008
Appendix
Less
Year 2023 volume 42 Issue 11
PDF
71
40
Cite this Article
BibTeX
Article Info
doi: 10.1007/s13131-023-2287-2
  • Receive Date：2022-12-20
  • Online Date：2025-11-22
  • Published：2023-11-25
Article Data
Affiliations
History
  • Received：2022-12-20
  • Accepted：2023-03-16
Funding
The National Key R&D Program of China under contract No. 2022YFE0140200; the National Natural Science Foundation of China under contract Nos 42127807 and 42006074; the China Ocean Mineral Resources R&D Association Project under contract Nos DY135-S1-1-02 and DY135-S1-1-01;the Macao Science and Technology Development Fund under contract No. FDCT-002/2018/A1.
Affiliations
    1 Key Laboratory of Submarine Geosciences, Second Institute of Oceanography, Ministry of Natural Resources, Hangzhou 310012, China
    2 School of Oceanography, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai 200030, China
    3 School of Marine Science and Engineering, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, China
    4 Institute of Science and Environment, University of Saint Joseph, Macao 999078, China
    5 Key Laboratory of Cenozoic Geology and Environment, Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100029, China

Corresponding:

References
Share
https://castjournals.cast.org.cn/joweb/aos/EN/10.1007/s13131-023-2287-2
Share to
QR

Scan QR to access full text

Cite this article
BibTeX
Citations
表12种不同金属材料的力学参数
科
Family		 属数
Number of
genus		 种数
Number of
species		 占总种数比例
Percentage of
total species (%)		 属
Genus		 种数
Number of
species		 占总种数比例
Percentage of total
species (%)
鹅膏菌科Amanitaceae 2 11 5.26 鹅膏菌属 Amanita 10 4.78
小菇科 Mycenaceae 2 12 5.74 丝盖伞属 Inocybe 5 2.39
多孔菌科 Polyporaceae 8 14 6.70 蜡蘑属 Laccaria 5 2.39
红菇科 Russulaceae 3 23 11.00 小皮伞属 Marasmius 6 2.87
小菇属 Mycena 11 5.26
光柄菇属 Pluteus 5 2.39
红菇属 Russula 17 8.13
栓菌属 Trametes 5 2.39
关闭全屏
  • BibTeX
  • EndNote
  • RefWorks
  • TxT
Links
Articles
Latest Articles
Most Read
Collections
Updates
Events
News
Multimedia
About
About Us
Contact
No. 86 Xueyuan South Road, Haidian District, Beijing
100081
010-62199257
qkjq@cast.org.cn

Copyright © 2025 China Association for Science and Technology. All rights reserved. For all open access content, the relevant licensing terms apply.
Sponsored by the Office of the Leading Group for Cybersecurity and Informatization of CAST, and supported by Science and Technology Review Publishing House