针对<矿床地质>2010年第5期刊登的张旗等(2010)"花岗岩与金铜及钨锡成矿的关系"一文中关于花岗岩分类及其与成矿作用关系的若干重要问题提出质疑,认为该文按照花岗岩Sr和Yb的含量将花岗岩分为埃达克型、喜马拉雅型、浙闽型和南岭型4类的方案存在3个问题:一是埃达克岩不能作为花岗岩分类学中的一种类型;二是花岗岩的Sr、Yb含量没有明确无误的分类指示作用;三是喜马拉雅、浙闽和南岭等几个地名未能包含和正确地代表所有的花岗岩.文章指出与花岗岩类有关的钨锡或金铜矿床主要属于热液矿床的范畴,因此与花岗岩具有密切的成因关系;与花岗岩有关的成矿作用一般与成岩同时或晚于成岩,但不可能早于成岩.文章列举了若干例子,证实金铜(铅锌银)和钨锡即使在一个矿床中共生也屡见不鲜,而并非如张旗等(2010)所说的"金铜和钨锡是相悖的".文章还对该文关于矿液与岩浆有各自的上升通道、金的"一次来源"等问题提出了不同看法.%As regards some important viewpoints on the genetic classification and related mineralization of granites from the paper “Relationship between granitic rocks and Au-Cu-W-Sn mineralization” written by Zhang Qi et al. (called “Zhang's paper” for short) in Mineral Deposits, the present author raises several doubts and questions for discussion. The classification put forward by “Zhang's paper” has three problems, i.e., 1, adakite as a special type of granitic rocks cannot be employed as one of the genetic types of granitoids; 2, Sr and Yb concentrations of granites do not have definite property as an indicator of genetic classification of granites; 3, the names of granite types such as Himalaya, Zhe-Min, and Nanling used by “Zhang' s paper” cannot well represent and incorporate all granites in these areas. It is pointed out that both W-Sn and Cu-Au deposits related to granitic rocks are mainly of hydrothermal geneses, and hence have close genetic relations with granitic rocks.Temporally the mineralization was generally simultaneous to or later than the rock-forming epoch, but could not be earlier than the granite. Many examples are put forward to prove that W-Sn and Cu-Au can co-exist in the same mineral deposit, which, however, was denied by “Zhang's paper”. The present paper also criticizes other points of view held by “Zhang's paper”, such as “ore-fluid and magma having respective ascending paths” and so-called “initial source of gold”.
展开▼
