1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 66, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 66, Issue 2
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

‐axis tipper electromagnetic and broadband magnetotelluric data were used to determine three‐dimensional electrical resistivity models of the Morrison porphyry Cu–Au–Mo deposit in British Columbia. ‐axis tipper electromagnetic data are collected with a helicopter, thus allowing rapid surveys with uniform spatial sampling. Ground‐based magnetotelluric surveys can achieve a greater exploration depth than ‐axis tipper electromagnetic surveys, but data collection is slower and can be limited by difficult terrain. The airborne ‐axis tipper electromagnetic tipper data and the ground magnetotelluric tipper data show good agreement at the Morrison deposit despite differences in the data collection method, spatial sampling, and collection date. Resistivity models derived from individual inversions of the ‐axis tipper electromagnetic tipper data and magnetotelluric impedance data contain some similar features, but the ‐axis tipper electromagnetic model appears to lack resolution below a depth of 1 km, and the magnetotelluric model suffers from non‐uniform and relatively sparse spatial sampling. The joint ‐axis tipper electromagnetic inversion solves these issues by combining the dense spatial sampling of the airborne ‐axis tipper electromagnetic technique and the deeper penetration of the lower frequency magnetotelluric data. The resulting joint resistivity model correlates well with the known geology and distribution of alteration at the Morrison deposit. Higher resistivity is associated with the potassic alteration zone and volcanic country rocks, whereas areas of lower resistivity agree with known faults and sedimentary units. The pyrite halo and ≥0.3% Cu zone have the moderate resistivity that is expected of disseminated sulphides. The joint ‐axis tipper electromagnetic inversion provides an improved resistivity model by enhancing the lateral and depth resolution of resistivity features compared with the individual ‐axis tipper electromagnetic and magnetotelluric inversions. This case study shows that a joint ‐axis tipper electromagnetic–magnetotelluric approach effectively images the interpreted mineralised zone at the Morrison deposit and could be beneficial in exploration for disseminated sulphides at other porphyry deposits.

© 2018 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2017 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12554
2017-10-09
2024-04-26

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12554
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aeroquest Surveys
    Aeroquest Surveys2009. Report on a helicopter‐borne AeroTEM system electromagnetic & magnetic survey. Geoscience BC Technical Report.
  2. BC Geological Survey
    BC Geological Survey2006. MapPlace GIS Internet mapping system; British Columbia Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, MapPlace website. http://www.MapPlace.ca. (accessed January 2016).
  3. CagniardL. 1953. Basic theory of the magneto‐telluric method of geophysical prospecting. Geophysics18, 605–635.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. CommerM. and NewmanG.A.2009. Three‐dimensional controlled‐source electromagnetic and magnetotelluric joint inversion. Geophysical Journal International178, 1305–1316.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. CookeD.R., HollingsP. and WalsheJ.L.2005. Giant porphyry deposits: characteristics, distribution, and tectonic controls. Economic Geology100, 801–818.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. FarquharsonC.G., OldenburgD.W., HaberE. and ShekhtmanR.2002. An algorithm for the three‐dimensional inversion of magnetotelluric data. Proceedings of the 72nd annual international meeting, SEG Expanded Abstracts, 649–652.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Geotech Ltd
    Geotech Ltd . 2010. ZTEM tipper AFMAG results over the Morrison copper/gold porphyry deposit. Geotech Ltd. Technical Report. http://geotech.ca/papers/ztem-tipper-afmag-results-over-the-morrison-coppergold-porphyry-deposit/.
  8. HollidayJ.R. and CookeD.R.2007. Advances in geological models and exploration methods for copper±gold porphyry deposits. Proceedings of Exploration7, 791–809.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. HolthamE.M.2012. 3D inversion of natural source electromagnetic data . Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, 137 p.
  10. HolthamE. and OldenburgD.W.2010. Three‐dimensional inversion of ZTEM data. Geophysical Journal International182(1), 168–182.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. HübertJ., LeeB.M., LiuL., UnsworthM.J., RichardsJ.P., AbbassiB.et al. 2016. Three‐dimensional imaging of a Ag–Au‐rich epithermal system in British Columbia, Canada, using airborne z‐axis tipper electromagnetic and ground‐based magnetotelluric data. Geophysics81(1), B1–B12.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. KaminskiV., LegaultJ.M. and KumarH.2010. The Drybones Kimberlite: a case study of VTEM and ZTEM airborne EM results. Australian Society of Exploration Geophysics Extended Abstracts.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. LegaultJ.M.2015. Airborne electromagnetic systems—State of the art and future directions. CSEG Recorder40(6), 38–49.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. LegaultJ.M., WijnsC., IzarraC. and PlastowG.2016. The Balboa ZTEM Cu–Mo–Au porphyry discovery at Cobre Panama. ASEG Extended Abstracts2016, 361–366.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. LiuL., RichardsJ.P., CreaserR.A., DuFraneS.A., MuehlenbachsK. and LarsonP.B.2016. Geology and age of the Morrison porphyry Cu–Au–Mo deposit, Babine Lake area, British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences53(9), 950–978.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. LoB. and ZangM.2008. Numerical modeling of Z‐TEM (airborne AFMAG) responses to guide exploration strategies. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts27(1), 1098–1102.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. LowellJ.D. and GuilbertJ.M.1970. Lateral and vertical alteration—mineralization zoning in porphyry copper ore deposits. Economic Geology65, 373–408.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. MackieR.M., WattsM.D., and RodiW.2007. Joint 3D inversion of marine CSEM and MT data. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts26, 574–578.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. McMillanW.J., ThompsonJ.F.H., HartC.J.R. and JohnstonS.T.1995. Regional geological and tectonic setting of porphyry deposits in British Columbia and Yukon territory. In: Porphyry deposits of the northwestern Cordillera of North America. Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum Special Volume46, 40–57.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. MejuM.A.1996. Joint inversion of TEM and distorted MT soundings: some effective practical considerations. Geophysics61(1), 56–65.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. MitchinsonD.E., EnkinR.J. and HartC.J.R.2013. Linking porphyry deposit geology to geophysics via physical properties: adding value to geoscience BC geophysical data. Geoscience BC Report 2013–14.
  22. MongerJ. and PriceR.2002. The Canadian Cordillera: geology and tectonic evolution. CSEG Recorder February 2002, 17–36.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. NabighianM.N. and MacnaeJ.C.1991. Time domain electromagnetic prospecting methods. Electrical Methods in Applied Geophysics2(A), 427–509.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. NelsonJ. and ColpronM.2007. Tectonics and metallogeny of the British Columbia, Yukon and Alaskan Cordillera, 1.8 Ga to the present. 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 Publication5, 755–791.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. NelsonP.H. and Van VoorhisG.D.1983. Estimation of sulfide content from induced polarization data. Geophysics48(1), 62–75.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. OrtaM., LegaultJ.M., PrikhodkoA., PlastowG., ZhaoS. and UlanskyC.2013. Passive and active helicopter EM survey comparisons over the 501 Project Cu–Zn volcanogenic massive sulphide at McFauld's Lake, northern Ontario. ASEG Extended Abstracts2013, 1633–1638.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Palacky, G.J.1988. Resistivity characteristics of geologic targets. Electromagnetic Methods in Applied Geophysics1, 53–129.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. ParéP. and LegaultJ.M.2010. Ground IP‐resistivity and airborne spectrum and helicopter ZTEM survey results over pebble copper‐moly‐gold porphyry deposit Alaska. SEG Annual Meeting Expanded Abstracts29, 1734–1738.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. ParéP., GribenkoA.V., CoxL.H., ČumaM., WilsonG.A., ZhdanovM.S.et al. 2012. 3D inversion of SPECTREM and ZTEM airborne electromagnetic data from the Pebble Cu–Au–Mo porphyry deposit, Alaska. Exploration Geophysics43(2), 104–115.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. ParkinsonW.D.1959. The influence of continents and oceans on geomagnetic variations. Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society6, 441–449.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. RichardsJ.P.2003. Tectono‐magmatic precursors for porphyry Cu–(Mo–Au) deposit formation. Economic Geology98, 1515–1533.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. RichardsJ.P.2009. Postsubduction porphyry Cu–Au and epithermal Au deposits: products of remelting of subduction‐modified lithosphere. Geology37(3), 247–250.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. RichardsJ.P.2011. Magmatic to hydrothermal metal fluxes in convergent and collided margins. Ore Geology Reviews40, 1–26.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. RobertsonJ.2009. Morrison Copper/Gold Project—Feasibility Study: NI43‐101 Report.
  35. SasakiY., YiM.J. and ChoiJ.2014. 2D and 3D separate and joint inversion of airborne ZTEM and ground AMT data: synthetic model studies. Journal of Applied Geophysics104, 149–155.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. SattelD. and WitherlyK.2015. The 3D joint inversion of MT and ZTEM data. ASEG Extended Abstracts2015, 1–4.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. SeigelH.O., NabighianM., ParasnisD.S. and Vozoff, K. (2007). The early history of the induced polarization method. Leading Edge26, 312–321.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. SillitoeR.H.1972. A plate tectonic model for the origin of porphyry copper deposits. Economic Geology67, 184–197.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. SillitoeR.H.1973. The tops and bottoms of porphyry copper deposits. Economic Geology68, 799–815.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. SillitoeR.H.2010. Porphyry copper systems. Economic Geology105(1), 3–41.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. SimpsonR.G.2007. Mineral Resource Update: Morrison Project. Pacific Booker Minerals Inc., 66 p.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. TikhonovA.N. 1950. On determining electrical characteristics of the deep layers of the Earth's crust. Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR73, 295–297.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. WalcottP.E.2001. A Geophysical Report on Magnetic and IP Surveying, Morrison Property.
  44. WannamakerP.E. and LegaultJ.M.2014. Two‐dimensional joint inversion of ZTEM and MT plane‐wave EM data for near surface applications. 27th annual symposium on the application of geophysics to engineering and environmental problems (SAGEEP).
  45. WardS.H.1959. AFMAG‐airborne and ground. Geophysics24(4), 761–787.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12554
Loading
3D joint inversion of magnetotelluric and airborne tipper data: a case study from the Morrison porphyry Cu–Au–Mo deposit, British Columbia, Canada
Geophysical Prospecting 66, 397 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12554
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12554
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12554
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Airborne electromagnetic; Joint inversion

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error