Volcanic Sequences Related to Kuroko Mineralization in the Hokuroku District, Northeast Japan

Abstract

Abstract. Kuroko deposits are a representative volcanic‐hosted massive sulfide deposit and the Hokuroku district is economically the most important Kuroko containing province in Japan. There are two cycles of the bimodal volcanic sequence in the Hokuroku district. The pre‐ore volcanism started with basaltic activity and was followed by intensive felsic hyaloclas‐tic activity under bathyal conditions. The post‐ore sequence also began with basaltic activity intercalated with mudstone and was followed by alternating beds of pumice tuff with several lava flows and mudstone. Kuroko deposits are situated in the final period of the pre‐ore felsic volcanic sequence of the first bimodal volcanic cycle.Based on a detailed investigation of existing age data, it was concluded that the felsic volcanic sequences in the pre‐and post‐Kuroko formation can be divided into a pre‐ore dacite group (16–13.5 Ma), a D2 dacite group (lower unit of the post‐ore volcanic sequence, 12.7±0.6∼ ll Ma) and a Dl dacite group (upper unit of the post‐ore sequence including quartz‐porphyry and granitoid, 11sim;10 Ma) in ascending order. Field and microscopic observations show that the pre‐ore dacite is characterized by aphyric to plagioclase‐phyric lava and the post‐ore dacitic rocks are characterized by quartz‐plagioclase‐phyric aphanitic lava and dome. These three dacite groups are petrochemically discriminated by SiO2‐Al2O3 and CaO‐TiO2 diagrams, excluding altered specimens. The distribution of the normative compositions on the Q‐An‐Ab‐Or diagram suggests that the pre‐ore dacites trend on the 5 kb cotectic line (equilibrated to 10—15 km deep) and those of the post‐ore trend along the 1 kb line (a few km deep). The secular variation of the major elements indicates that the rhyolitic members genetically related to the Kuroko formation could be the most differentiated products in the pre‐ore felsic volcanism.The distribution of Nb against SiO2 content in the pre‐ and post‐ore bimodal volcanic cycles indicates that these two volcanisms could have been generated by different magmatic origins. The difference would have been caused by the tectonic conversion from a back‐arc to an island‐arc setting.