Byrne, Mag Susc Mapping Et Al 2019 Ore Geology Reviews

Ore Geology Reviews 107 (2019) 201–217
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Ore Geology Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/oregeorev
Variability of outcrop magnetic susceptibility and its relationship to the T

porphyry Cu centers in the Highland Valley Copper district
K. Byrnea, , G. Lesageb, W.A. Morrisc, R.J. Enkind, S.A. Gleesone,f, R.G Leeb
⁎
a
Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Alberta, Alberta, Canada
b
Mineral Deposit Research Unit, The University of British Columbia, British Columbia, Canada
c
School of Geography & Earth Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1, Canada
d
Paleomagnetism and Petrophysics Laboratory, Geological Survey of Canada, British Columbia, Canada
e
Helmholtz Centre Potsdam GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Potsdam 14473, Germany
f
Institute of Geological Sciences, Freie Universität Berlin, Malteserstrasse, 74-100, Berlin 12249, Germany
ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT
Keywords: The Highland Valley Copper porphyry Cu-(Mo) centers compose Canada’s largest porphyry Cu mining district, and are
Magnetic susceptibility hosted in plutonic rocks of the Late Triassic Guichon Creek batholith in the Quesnel terrane, British Columbia. Here we
Porphyry Cu evaluate the relationship between variations in magnetic susceptibility and alteration in order to define a footprint
Outcrop around the porphyry Cu centers using a district-scale dataset of 1610 minimally weathered outcrops and 11,432
Variability
magnetic susceptibility measurements. Statistical analysis of the outcrop-based measurements revealed changes in
Coefficient of variation
outcrop geometric mean magnetic susceptibility and the coefficient of variation (extent of variability in relation to the
Alteration
Footprint mean) are proportional to vein frequency and altered rock volume estimates. At a confidence interval of 95% and 9
Physical properties degrees of freedom, the average standard error (uncertainty) of the geometric mean and coefficient of variation from 10
Exploration magnetic susceptibility outcrop measurements is 7.3% and 13.2%, respectively. Modeling of outcrop magnetic sus-
Ore-forming processes ceptibility data shows that domains of coefficient of variation of > 0.3 extend 1–4 km away from the porphyry centers,
whereas pronounced susceptibility lows of < 10 × 10−3 SI have a smaller footprint centered on the Cu-mineralization.
The magnitude of change of magnetic susceptibility coefficient of variation between protolith and altered rocks in the
porphyry Cu footprint is greater than the corresponding change in susceptibility geometric means. Thus, with some
caveats, variability in magnetic susceptibility provides a good signal that corresponds to vein and alteration intensity,
and can potentially be used to map ore-forming processes and to vector to porphyry Cu centers.
1. Introduction et al., 2009; Gettings and Bultman, 2014), comparing instruments (Lee
and Morris, 2013; Deng, 2015), or reconciling aeromagnetic anomalies
Ground and airborne magnetic methods have long been used in (Austin and Foss, 2014). There have been a limited number of studies
porphyry Cu exploration at a wide range of scales (Nabighian et al., that use un-weathered outcrop or drill-core magnetic susceptibility
2005) for the dual purpose of supporting geological interpretations, and readings to characterize and map alteration features associated with
for the direct detection of magnetic minerals that can be associated with mineralization processes (Lapointe et al., 1986; Hrouda et al., 2009;
mineralization (Holliday and Cooke, 2007). Typically, case studies have Mitchinson et al., 2013, Austin et al., 2017), information required for
focused on aeromagnetic survey methodology and how magnetic in- meaningful geophysical inversions (Oldenburg and Pratt, 2007). Lee
tensity and derivative products relate to mineral deposits (Hoover et al., et al. (2010) used drill-core and outcrop magnetic susceptibility mea-
1994; Nabighian et al., 2005; Reeves, 2005), clusters of deposits at a surement, and forward modeling of total magnetic intensity data, to
regional scale (Behn et al., 2001), or the structural architecture of por- identify fractures and faults in the Dashwa Lakes pluton, Ontario– thus
phyry Cu districts (Lesage et al., 2019). At the system-scale, porphyry Cu- linking spatial variations of apparent magnetic susceptibility to fracture
(Au, Mo) deposits can be characterized by roughly circular-shaped systems. The ability to map and model fractures in the crust is critical in
magnetic intensity lows, or torus-like lows around a central high (e.g. mineral exploration targeting because fracture and permeability gen-
Fig. 1; Holden et al., 2011; Clark, 2014). Rock magnetic susceptibility eration are key ore-forming processes in magmatic-hydrothermal systems
studies appear to be more focused on characterizing lithology (Hrouda (Fournier, 1999; Weis, 2016).
⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: kbyrne@ualberta.ca (K. Byrne).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oregeorev.2019.02.015
Received 13 November 2018; Received in revised form 12 February 2019; Accepted 13 February 2019
Available online 14 February 2019
0169-1368/ © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
K. Byrne, et al. Ore Geology Reviews 107 (2019) 201–217
Theoretical magnetic intensity profiles A Kamloops

2-3 km erosion volcanic rocks
RTP intensity
(Eocene)
(nT)
N
Anthropogenic
material
no erosion
0 km
1 km
Valley Bethlehem
Supercrustal
2 km hostrocks
2-3 km erosion J.A.
Cu zone
3 km Lornex
Highmont
4 km
Spences Bridge
Lornex fault
Group
(Cretaceous)
Vein and alteration facies

Intermediate argillic Sericitic
Advanced argillic Potassic (magnetite-bearing)
Propylitic Sodic-calcic Simplified

Cu-occurence facies
Rock types Cu-Mo Cu-Fe
Cu-Ag Cu only
Porphyry dikes Cu-Zn Zn-Pb
Causitive intrusions Precursor intrusions Porphyry Cu
mineralization outline
Fig. 1. Vertical and lateral alteration zonation in porphyry Cu system (modifed 0 5 10
from Halley et al., 2015) and the theoretical magnetic signature at different Guichon batholith rock types Km
erosion levels (after Clark, 2014). Wallrocks Felsic facies
(locally hornfelsed) (biotite-dominant)
Gump phase (granodiorite) Dikes, undivided
The volume of hydrothermally altered rocks around Cu-Fe-sulfide Undivided Nicola 6 Bethsaida (monzogranite)
Group rocks (andesitic) 5 Skeena (granodiorite)
mineralization in porphyry deposits is termed “the footprint”. An un-
Mafic facies 4 Bethlehem (granodiorite)
derstanding of how veins and alteration relate to changes in host-rock (hornblende-dominant)
magnetic susceptibility in the porphyry Cu footprint is critical to de- Chataway (granodiorite) Breccia
3
Post-mineral stocks
veloping better exploration tools, and models for ore-forming processes. 2 Guichon (granodiorite)
Four major porphyry Cu-(Mo) systems, hosted in the Late Triassic 1 Border, (undivided (quartz Outcrop survey site
diorite to monzogabbro)
Guichon Creek batholith (GCB), occur in the Highland Valley Copper
(HVC) district in British Columbia; which collectively are Canada’s B
largest and longest operating porphyry Cu mining district (Fig. 2; Ydon,
2007; Byrne et al., 2013; Sillitoe, 2013). We evaluate the relationship
between outcrop magnetic susceptibility data and the alteration sur-
rounding the prolific HVC mining district. We calculate ranges of un-
certainty and show that the variability in magnetic susceptibility
measurements at individual outcrops can be correlated to vein fre-
quency and altered rock volume. We then up-scale this observation to a
district data set of 1610 outcrops, and show how domains of higher
magnetic variability, and susceptibility lows, define a footprint of the
porphyry Cu systems at HVC. Furthermore, we validate the magnetic
susceptible footprint by correlating to the distribution of mapped veins
and alteration, and other geological features. Our findings are sig-
nificant to exploration because they show how commonly collected
magnetic susceptibility data can be used for defining the porphyry Cu
footprint, and as a mappable spatial proxy for ore-forming processes. Tertiary and
Additionally, this work provides some insight into the processes that Cenozoic cover
cause changes in rock properties.
0 0.5 1
Km
2. Porphyry Cu alteration zones and magnetic susceptibility (caption on next page)
The host-rocks to porphyry Cu systems are commonly andesitic

volcanic rocks and/or intermediate composition intrusions that are
202
Fig. 2. Study location maps. A. Guichon baholith geology and the Highland and that vein fill and altered rock halos have a different response than
Valley Copper district. Blue frame indicates the location of Fig. 2B. The fault the host-rock. A second and important caveat is that surface measure-
network shown is from Lesage et al. (2019). B. Geology of the Bethlehem de- ments of provide meaningful, and representative, estimates of rock
posit and location of the magnetic susceptibility study site. Lithology numbers magnetic susceptibility. In Canada surface weathering of outcrops is
refer to the major rock units in the district as shown in Fig. 2A. (For inter-
minimal and insignificant primarily because most rock surfaces were
pretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to
scoured during the most recent glacial period (< 15,000 years). For lo-
the web version of this article.)
calities with deep weathering profiles, rock susceptibility measurements
should be collected on fresh drill-core samples. A detailed investigation
magnetite-bearing (Clark, 1999; Sillitoe, 2010; Clark, 2014). Porphyry of the link between alteration mineralogy and changes in the protolith
Cu systems typically exhibit a predictable spatial and temporal dis- magnetic properties is beyond the scope of this contribution.
tribution of alteration minerals that is the result of a common thermal
and chemical evolution (Fig. 1; Table 1; Seedorff et al., 2005). The deep 3. Background geology
and central part of the system is characterized by potassic alteration
that zones upwards to sericitic (fine-grained white-mica), and then into The allochthonous Quesnel terrane in the Canadian Cordillera is
advanced argillic alteration (Fig. 1). Additionally, at deep levels po- characterized by Mesozoic island-arc assemblages comprised of volcanic
tassic ( ± magnetite) alteration can zone laterally to sodic-calcic or and sedimentary rocks and associated intrusions (Coney et al., 1980).
propylitic alteration, whereas at intermediate and shallow levels the Several plutons in the Quesnel terrane are genetically and spatially re-
peripheral alteration comprises propylitic and intermediate argillic or lated to porphyry Cu deposit formation (Logan and Mihalynuk, 2014).
argillic assemblages, respectively (Fig. 1; Table 1; Seedorff et al., 2005; The Late Triassic I-type calc-alkalic GCB intruded the Nicola Group
Sillitoe, 2010). Thus, the plan-view distribution of alteration facies is volcano-sedimentary rocks between approximately 211 to 207 Ma, prior
partly a function of erosional level. Critically, the erosional depth, and to docking with ancestral North America, and hosts the HVC district
the presence of secondary or primary magnetite in potassic zones, (Byrne et al., 2013; Nelson et al., 2013; D’Angelo et al., 2017). Exposure
strongly influences how the porphyry Cu footprint manifest in airborne and aeromagnetic data indicate the GCB is approximately 25 by 65 km in
total magnetic intensity surveys (i.e. Fig. 1; Clark, 2014). size with a north-northwest-elongated ellipsoidal geometry near the
Physical property analysis of drill core from calc-alkalic porphyry Cu surface (Ager et al., 1972; McMillan, 1985). Several texturally, compo-
systems in British Columbia show that quartz-sericite-bearing alteration sitionally, and temporally distinct intrusive rocks occur in the GCB
assemblages have lower magnetic susceptibilities when compared to their (Northcote 1969; McMillan 1976; D’Angelo, 2016.). Older marginal and
intrusive and volcanic host-rocks (Mitchinson et al., 2013). Propylitic al- equigranular mafic-rich diorites and granodiorites transition to younger,
teration can also affect primary magnetite resulting in lower suscept- centrally located, in-equigranular to porphyritic mafic-poor granodiorites
ibilities (Clark, 1999). Potassic assemblages can be associated with sus- (Fig. 2A). The HVC porphyry centers formed between ∼209 and 207 Ma
ceptibility highs or lows depending on whether secondary magnetite is and are hosted in the mafic mineral-poor granodiorites in the center of
formed during alteration, or the primary magnetite is destroyed (Seedorff the batholith (D’Angelo et al., 2017). Four porphyry Cu centers compose
et al., 2005; Mitchinson et al., 2013). Detailed mineralogical work at the the HVC district– Bethlehem, J.A., Valley-Lornex, and Highmont
Escondida porphyry, in northern Chile, shows that destruction of Fe-Ti (Fig. 2A; Byrne et al., 2013). Numerous Cu-occurrences of various size
oxide minerals and a two-order of magnitude reduction in bulk suscept- and tenor also occur throughout the GCB (McMillan et al., 2009). The
ibility occurs in a broad domain of pervasive quartz-sericite and argillic Valley-Lornex porphyry center has the largest footprint and is the best
alteration around inner potassic assemblages (Riveros et al., 2014). In endowed system in the HVC district (Fig. 2A; Byrne et al., 2013). Post-
contrast, the highest bulk susceptibility values in the Escondida porphyry mineralization regional-scale faulting has off-set geological contacts and
system came from centrally located potassic and chlorite-sericite altered segmented the once contiguous Valley-Lornex porphyry Cu center
rocks in which coarser secondary magnetite grains occur (Riveros et al., (Hollister et al., 1975; McMillan, 1976; lesage et al., 2019).
2014). In situ measurements of hydrothermally altered rocks from several In the HVC porphyry centers, chalcopyrite, bornite, and localized
other Chilean porphyry Cu deposits display localized high-variability of molybdenite occurs with 1) veinlets and discontinuous fracture fill of
natural remanence and susceptibility when compared to samples from quartz with K-feldspar halos (potassic alteration); 2) quartz with coarse-
regional intrusions (Tapia et al., 2016). The studies of the magnetic grained muscovite halos (coarse-muscovite early-halo veins; potassic-
properties of rocks in and around porphyry Cu deposits demonstrate that sericitic transition); and with 3) pervasive and fracture-controlled fine-
hydrothermal alteration can affect Fe–Ti oxide mineralogy and abundance grained sericite–chlorite (sericitic) alteration (McMillan, 1985; Byrne
and consequently modify host-rock paleomagnetic natural remanence and et al., 2013; Lesage et al., 2016). Peripheral to the porphyry Cu-miner-
susceptibilities (Mitchinson et al., 2013; Riveros et al., 2014; Tapia et al., alization alteration is restricted to generally narrow 1–3 cm halos around
2016). Critically, the assessment of rock magnetic properties and petrology a low density of prehnite and / or epidote veinlets (Lesage et al., 2016;
provide a link to the empirical observation that many porphyry systems, at Byrne et al., 2017). Epidote ± actinolite veins with K-feldspar-destruc-
the system-scale, are characterized by roughly circular-shaped magnetic tive albite halos (sodic-calcic alteration) occur in a ∼ 0.5–1.5 km-wide
intensity lows, or torus-like lows around a concomitant central high north-northeast-elongated domain in the northeast portion of the bath-
(Holden et al., 2011; Clark, 2014). Furthermore, magmatic-hydrothermal olith, and in a ∼ 3 km wide domain that extends for ∼7 km south of
processes in porphyry Cu deposits are interpreted to cause high short- Lornex and Highmont (Byrne et al., 2017). Veinlets of prehnite ±
range variance in magnetic properties that are potentially in high contrast epidote ± pumpellyite with plagioclase-destructive, K-feldspar-stable,
to the distal country rocks (Tapia et al., 2016). sericite–prehnite halos (propylitic alteration) are the most common and
We hypothesize that hydrothermal alteration around porphyry Cu widely distributed alteration facies in the batholith. The highest density
systems can be characterized by not only lower susceptibilities, but also of propylitic veinlets is centered on the porphyry systems, but this facies
by a higher degree of magnetic variation than is normal for the typical is present out to the margins of the batholith (Byrne et al., 2017).
porphyry Cu system host-rocks (volcanic and intrusive). At HVC we test
whether the variation in magnetic susceptibility readings at individual 4. Methodology
outcrops can be related to vein and alteration intensity, and critically,
whether a measure of susceptibility variation forms a district-scale 4.1. Data collection
footprint that is spatially associated with mapped alteration and the
porphyry Cu centers. An underlying caveat, however, is that a set of Magnetic susceptibility measurements were collected using KT-10
outcrop susceptibility measurements is taken within a single rock type, magnetic susceptibility meters at outcrops adjacent to the Bethlehem
203
K. Byrne, et al.
Table 1
Characteristics of Principal Alteration Facies in Porphyry Cu systems (after Seedorff et al., 2005; Sillitoe, 2010).
Processes or type of Definition (general Temperature range) Key minerals ± Qtz; (secondary Associated fracture fill Position in system
chemical reaction; minerals); [carbonates, sulphates,
Alteration facies phosphates]
Volatile addition
Intermediate Argillic Ksp remains unaltered. Kaol and mont with ser-ill and chl Ser-ill, kaol, mont, chl [ca, rhod, fl, ba] Pyrite and basemetal veins At high levels outboard of advanced argillic
replace bio or plag rather than ksp or ab; (100–150 °C) zones; at depth overprinting formerly
feldspar-stable rocks in the potassic core
zone.
Propylitic Weakly metasomatized rocks with addition of volatiles, Chl, ep, ab, ser-ill, mont, relict ksp; (zoi, Ca, ep, hm, and chl veins with ill-defined propylitic Marginal parts of systems below lithocaps
such as CO2 and H2O; (350–200 °C) clz, zeo, act); [ca, ank, relict ap] envelopes and distal to Cu mineralization
Sericitic Musc (ser) field on T vs. K/H diagram; moderate to strong Ser, (ab, tpz, tour), chl, (ep, clz); pyroph, Shallow; qtz, ser, py veins with sericitic halos- “D”- Overprinting and extending upwards from
hydrolitic (addition of H) alteration that can be kaol-dick if transitional to advanced veins. Deep; sheeted veins ranging from veinlets to the top part of the potassic Cu core
accompanied by Na-depletion. Primary or secondary ksp is argillic; [(Ca), fl, (anh), ap] wider zones with podlike cores of qtz and sulphide,
altered to ser + qtz, bio altered to ser-chl. Transitions coarse “greisen” variety sericite
upwards from ser-chl to ser-qtz dominated; (250–350 °C)
Alkali depletion, quartz addition
204
Advanced Argillic Mineral assemblage T dependent: pyroph field on T vs. K/ Kaol-dick, pyroph, dias, tpz; (ab); [alun, Sulphide veins and massive replacement High levels above sericitic and potassic zones
H diagram to lower T kaol stability; (280–360 °C) APS, scorz-laz, ba] (lithocap)
Alkali exchange
Potassic Ksp stability field on T vs. K/H diagram, most commonly Ksp, bio, mt, tour, mus; (and, chl, ab, tpz); Early-dark-micaceous (EDM), early-micaceous (EH), Centrally located, core, of porphyry Cu
expressed as precursor hbd and px altered to aggregates of [anh, fl, ca, ap] sugary qtz “A”-veins, banded quartz “B”-veins with Mo systems
fine-grained (shreddy) bio and precursor plag altered to
ksp; (350–550 °C)
Sodic-calcic Moderate to strong metasomatism in which sodic plag Act, ep; (plag, tit, some rt); [(ca), ap] Bleached halos on narror act or ep veinlets or fracture Present in root zone, generally concentrated
replaces primary ksp; act, chl ep replace mafics and halos on the upper parts of the cupola, outboard of
magnetite; (300–450 °C) potassic core.
Sodic Ab replaces ksp and plag; chl, ep, ser, and tour replace Ab, chl, ep, tour, verm; (py, rt, some tit); Qtz, py, tour veins have ab-chl envelopes. Weakly Can cut through ore body and extend to
mafic minerals; (200–350 °C; lower T than Na-Ca) [ca, ap] bleached domains contain ab and act with py and or shallower levels where it transitions into
spec. sericitic alteration
Calcic Metasomatic addition of Ca, characterized by gt, px, plag gt, px, plag, ep ep Present in root zone, generally concentrated
and ep in igneous protoliths on the upper parts of the cupola
ab = albite; act = actinolite; alun = alunite; and = andalucite; anh = anhydrite; ank = ankerite; ap = apatite; bio = biotite; ca = carbonates; chl = chlorite; clz = clinozoisite; dias = diaspore; dick = dickite;
ep = epidote; fl = fluorite; gt = garnet; hm = hematite; ill = illite; kaol = kaolinite; ksp = K-feldspar; mont = montmorillonite; musc = muscovite (coarse grained); plag = plagioclase; py = pyrite; pyroph = pyr-
ophyllite; qtz = quartz; rhod = rhodochrosite; rt = rutile; ser = sericite (fine grained); tit = titanite (sphene); tour = tourmaline; tpz = topaz; verm = vermiculite; zeo = zeolite; zoi = zoisite.
pit, and throughout the district. Teck Resources Limited provided dis-
NE corner
trict-scale outcrop susceptibility measurements from its property, which 643501E, 5596068N,
was augmented by data collected by the Canadian Mining Innovation 1446m elv.
0 2
Council (CMIC) Footprints Project researchers (Lesher et al., 2017).
There are 1610 outcrops with susceptibility measurements in the dis- m
trict data set for the GCB, with a minimum of 5 readings at each out-
crop. Measurement points were collected at approximately 0.5 m in- Map Zone 1
tervals with no particular emphasis on where alteration veins were
located. The KT-10′s were operated in non-pin measurement mode,
zeroed in the air between measurements, and readings taken on flat
outcrop surfaces utilizing the whole face of the meter to reduce in-
strumentation error (Lee and Morris, 2013; Deng, 2015). The KT-10
exhibits no significant temporal or thermal drift in non-pin measure- outcrop outline
ment mode (< 2%; Deng, 2015). We infer that the uncertainty asso-
ciated with utilizing data from multiple instruments over several years
is less significant than instrument error, and the uncertainty associated
with averaging multiple readings across an outcrop. The latter source of
uncertainty is investigated below. Map Zone 2
To permit direct comparison of the lithology, vein and alteration
features, unobscured flat and minimally weathered outcrops adjacent
with Bethlehem pit were chosen as the study site (Fig. 2B, 3, and 4). The
outcrop was divided into four zones from the farthest (north) to closest
to the pit wall margin (south); a distance of approximately 25 m
(Figs. 3 and 4A). Ten measurement sets of ten measurements each were
completed in each of the four zones, resulting in a total of four hundred
magnetic susceptibility measurements. Uncertainty and reproducibility
of magnetic susceptibility geometric mean and coefficient of variation
are estimated from repeat measurement sets of the same outcrops.
Map Zone 3
4.2. Data processing
Bulk magnetic susceptibility in igneous rocks has a lognormal dis-

tribution and the geometric mean is a more meaningful term for asses-
sing the population differences between rocks than using the arithmetic
mean (Aitchison and Brown, 1957, Latham et al., 1989, Limpert et al.,
2001). Lapointe et al. (1984) used log transformed magnetic suscept-
ibility and cumulative frequency plotted on a probability scale to effec-
fracture, joint, or weak
tively test for disparate magnetic response populations related to al- fracture foliation
teration. Subsequently, the log10 magnetic susceptibility, geometric
mean, standard deviation and coefficient of variation, and the cumula-
tive frequency of various geological populations have been calculated.
Although the geometric mean and the log-normal transformation offers
many advantages for characterizing different populations, quantitative
geo-spatial modeling of magnetic anomalies requires estimation of the
average bulk susceptibility of a rock population, hence the arithmetic
mean is more representative. Coefficient of variation is a unit-less mea- Map Zone 4
surement of dispersion of a single variable calculated from the ratio of
the standard deviation to the mean. Coefficient of variation allows for a
better measure of dispersion than the standard deviation for variables
with different means. Geometric coefficient of variation (Kirkwood, pit margin
1979) is used to describe the dispersion of lognormal data. Equations
used are provided in Appendix A. Key gravel =
albite epidote halo tourmaline fill

4.3. Geostatistical interpolants
sericite-chlorite halo epidote fill
Two interpolant methods in Esri’s ArcGIS Geostatistical Analyst were
used to model regional outcrop magnetic susceptibility data: Empirical sericite fracture halo prehnite fill
Bayesian Kriging (EBK) and Inverse Distance Weighted (IDW).
Fig. 3. Geological map of the magnetic susceptibility variability study site at
Empirical Bayesian Kriging is a probabilistic interpolation method that
Bethlehem. The host-rock is Guichon facies (unit 2 in Fig. 2B). The map zones
accounts for the error in estimating the underlying semi-variogram correspond to results shown in Table 3. Gravel is mostly anthropogenic.
through repeated automated simulations (Krivoruchko, 2012). Selected
modeling criterion for the EBK interpolant are: log transformation of
the coefficient of variation values; exponential fit for the semivariogram (ESRI, 2017). The interpolation determines average cell values using a
curve; and a 200 m cell size. linearly weighted combination of a set of sample points, and the weight
The IDW interpolant is a deterministic model which assumes that is a function of inverse distance raised to a power (Watson and Philip,
each measured point has a local influence that diminishes with distance 1985). It gives greater weights to points closest to the prediction location,
205
Fig. 4. The Bethlehem study site. A. View looking south towards map zone 4. B. A portion of map zone 4 showing a tourmaline vein with a sericite halo.
and the weights diminish as a function of distance (Watson and Philip, Table 2
1985). Selected modeling criteria for the IDW interpolant are: inverse Summary of vein and alteration halo and magnetic susceptibility measurements
distance raised to the power of 4 (nearby data have more influence); at the Bethlehem study site.
200 m cell size; 1000 m search radius; and a 0.2 smoothing factor. Zone 4 Zone 3 Zone 2 Zone 1
The interpolant raster products were converted to polygons for ease
of symbolizing and to display with additional data sets. The coefficient Total vein frequency 4.3 1.5 1.3 1.2
Vein fill plus alteration halo (cm) 4.5 2.3 2 1.2
of variation values are symbolized using the percentiles intervals: 0-
Total altered volume % (per m) 19.4 3.4 2.6 1.4
60th, 60-65th, 65-70th, 70-75th, 75-80th, 80-85th, 85-90th, 90-95th, Max distance from pit wall 4 12 17 24
95-97th, and > 97th. The rationale for the chosen intervals is presented Area of map zone (m2) 11.3 3.5 3.8 13.8
below. The outcrop magnetic susceptibility interpolant was symbolized Magnetic susceptibility (×10-3SI) 23.6 26.6 28 31.4
using geometric intervals. arithmetic mean
Magnetic susceptibility (×10-3SI) 19.6 23.5 25.3 29.8
geometric mean
5. Results Arithmetic Stdev 10.6 9.3 9.8 9
Geometric Stdev 2.1 1.7 1.7 1.4
5.1. Bethlehem study site geology Range 42.9 39 37.8 64.6
IQR 16.7 11.6 13.2 11
Min 0.6 1.9 3.2 6.3
The host-rock at the Bethlehem study site is the Guichon grano- Max 43.5 40.9 41 70.9
diorite, a homogenous, equigranular, hornblende, biotite and magnetite Arithmetic CV 0.45 0.35 0.35 0.28
k
bearing granodiorite (D’Angelo, 2016). Veinlets containing pre- Geometric CV 1.07 0.7 0.67 0.42
hnite ± epidote with weak sericite–chlorite ± prehnite alteration
Geometric CV = CVt = e ln 1, where σ is σg (Kirkwood, 1979).
halos are common in map zone 1 (Fig. 3). Tourmaline veinlets (Fig. 4B)
IQR = inter quartile range.
increase towards the pit margin and appear to be cross-cut and / or re- Stdev. = standard deviation.
opened by prehnite-bearing veins map zone (Fig. 3). Fractures with
discontinuous epidote fill and sericite–chlorite halos are more common A decrease in magnetic susceptibility from zone 1 to zone 4 is evident
in map zone 3 (Fig. 3), where a few epidote veins with albite halos are (Fig. 6). The four zones have a similar response between approximately
also found. Zone 4, at the pit margin, contains sulfide veinlets with 26 × 10−3 SI and 45 × 10−3 SI which corresponds to unaltered rock
limonite–sericite–chlorite alteration halos and has more epidote veins measurements. Below approximately 26 × 10−3 SI, however, there is an
with albite halos than the other zones. Epidote veins with albite halos inflection in the probabilities and the populations for each map zone di-
cross-cut tourmaline-epidote veins, and the sulphide veinlets. The verge (Fig. 6). Overall map zone 4 has the lowest magnetic susceptibility
measured vein frequency and volume of altered rock show an increase and contrasts with the response for zone 1 (Table 2; Fig. 6). Below ap-
towards the Bethlehem pit margin and mineralization (Fig. 3; Table 2). proximately 26 × 10−3 SI, the magnetic susceptibility response for map
zones 2 and 3sit between that of zones 1 and 4.
5.2. Bethlehem study site magnetic susceptibility and relationship to mapped The changes in magnetic susceptibility response correlate with
veins changes in vein frequency and estimated altered rock volume. Based on
the magnetic susceptibility geometric mean per map zone (n = 100 per
Magnetic susceptibility values at the Bethlehem study site range map zone), a decrease from 29.8 × 10−3 to 19.6 × 10−3 SI towards the
between 0.6 × 10−3 and 70 x 10−3 SI, and the data has a negative-skew pit margin occurs (Table 2; Fig. 7). The decrease in magnetic suscept-
(Fig. 5). Three populations within the data are evident and these cor- ibility geometric mean corresponds to an increase in vein frequency and
respond to the magnetic response from 1) least altered rock, 2) rock volume of altered rock (Fig. 7). The geometric coefficient of variation
with fractures with sericite–chlorite halos, and 3) rock fractures with has been calculated for each map zone (Table 1; Fig. 7). The coefficient
albite halos (Fig. 5). The magnetic susceptibility response for unaltered of variation increases towards the pit margin and has a positive cor-
Guichon granodiorite ranges between approximately 26 × 10−3 SI and relation with vein frequency and volume of altered rock, and a negative
45 × 10−3 SI (Fig. 5). Exposures with veins with a sericite–chlorite halo correlation with mean magnetic susceptibility (Fig. 7).
have a lower response than unaltered host-rock, but veins with albite By comparing the magnetic susceptibility geometric data of each
halos have the lowest susceptibility (Fig. 5). All the alteration at the zone to the corresponding values for map zone 1, an absolute relative
margin of the Bethlehem pit is associated with a decrease in magnetic change term (ARC%) can be used to measure the relative change as a
susceptibility relative to the protolith. function of distance from the pit margin. The ARC% of the magnetic
The cumulative frequency of the magnetic susceptibilities from each susceptibility means between zone 1 and 4 is ∼34%, however, the
map zone was calculated to assess at which values the zones differ (Fig. 6). ARC% of their coefficient of variation is ∼154%, a considerably
206
Frequency stronger signal. The ARC% of the magnetic susceptibility mean and
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 coefficient of variation values for zones 2 and 3 lie between that of
0 zones 1 and 4 (Table 3; Fig. 7).
Magnetic susceptibility in 1.7 unit bins (x10-3 SI)
2.5
5.0 5.3. Uncertainty and reproducibility
7.5 Epidote // albite
Repeatability of measurements refers to the variation in repeat
10.0
measurements made on the same subject under identical conditions.
12.5
Individual magnetic susceptibility measurements were collected from the
15.0 same outcrop but were not taken in exactly the same location.
17.5 Prehnite ± epidote Subsequently, this analysis of uncertainty refers to reproducibility; the
20.0 ± tourmaline variation in measurements made on a subject under changing conditions.
// sericite-chlorite
22.5 By collecting ten sets of ten magnetic susceptibility measurements for
each of the mapped zones (Fig. 3) the reproducibility (standard error) of
25.0
outcrop means by this data collection method can be assessed (Table 4).
27.5 At a confidence interval of 95% and 9 (n-1) degrees of freedom, the
30.0 average standard error of the geometric mean from 10 magnetic suscept-
32.5 ibility measurements from the 4 map zones is 7.3% (Table 4). Embedded in
35.0 the uncertainty of geometric mean calculation is the instrumentation error.
Least altered However, uncertainty is also dependent on the outcrop variability, thus the
37.5
rock most altered outcrop (map zone 4) has the highest uncertainty at ∼13% of
40.0
the mean compared to just 3% in zone 1 (Table 4). The average standard
42.5 error for the repeat values of the coefficient of variation from the four maps
zones is 13.2%. A similar increase in uncertainty of the coefficient of
Zone 1 Zone 3 variation is observed from map zone 1 to map zone 4 (Table 4). Increasing
Map Zones the number of measurements included in the calculations reduces un-
Zone 2 Zone 4
certainty, however, at 10 readings within ∼10 m2 area of moderately al-
Fig. 5. Frequency distribution of all magnetic susceptibility readings at the tered rock (∼20 vol%) an acceptable level of uncertainty (∼13–18%) for
Bethlehem study outcrop site (n = 399; one outlier removed for clarity at
the mean and coefficient of variation is achieved (Table 4).
70 × 10−3). Alteration mineralogy = vein fill // alteration halo. Magnetic re-
An alternative and visual way to evaluate the reproducibility of
sponse boundaries between alteration facies and fresh rock are overlapping and
magnetic susceptibility measurements, and subsequent mean and
approximate.
coefficient of variation, is to test the data on minimum–maximum plots
(Fig. 8). The 100 data points per map zone were split into the first 50
and second 50 measurements and then organized from minimum to
100 maximum value for cross-plotting on log scale (Fig. 8). Perfectly re-
producible data would plot on the 1:1 line. The minimum–maximum
plots show no systematic bias across the 4 map zones. Excluding the
50 lower quartile of susceptibility values greatly improves the correlation
between measurements sets (Fig. 8), particularly for map zones 3 and 4,
indicating that low susceptibility values are the primary contributor to
outcrop variability and uncertainty of the mean.
Magnetic susceptibility (x 10-3 SI)
20
5.4. Up-scaling to the district porphyry footprint
10 5.4.1. Estimation of altered rock volume from mapping data

The orientation, vein fill width, alteration halo width, vein fre-
quency per meter, and mineralogy are recorded for vein sets exposed in
5 743 outcrops in the Guichon Creek batholith. The vein fill and altera-
tion halo widths were added and then multiplied by their corresponding
frequency per meter. This product was then summed for each vein set,
independent of mineralogy and orientation, to estimate the altered rock
Map Zones volume percentage (%) at each individual outcrop. The frequency dis-
2
Zone 1 tribution of altered rock volume % for outcrops in the Guichon Creek
batholith has a log normal distribution (Fig. 9).
Zone 2
1
Zone 3 5.4.2. Outcrop magnetic susceptibility data and relationship to altered rock
volume %
Zone 4 Results from the outcrop study site at Bethlehem demonstrate that
as the altered rock volume % increases the magnetic susceptibility
variability also increases. There is a similar relationship between the
1 2 5 10 25 50 90 99 99.9 altered rock volume % and the corresponding magnetic susceptibility
Cumulative frequency (%) geometric mean and coefficient of variation in the district outcrop data
set (Figs. 10 and 11). Fig. 10 includes all rock facies in the batholith and
Fig. 6. Comparison of map zone magnetic susceptibility measurements (log has not been filtered to exclude outcrops of aplite dikes (∼1% of data;
scale) versus their cumulative frequency (probability scale) at the Bethlehem low susceptibility) or rocks with abundant mafic-rich inclusions (un-
study site. known proportion of data; typically, high susceptibility). Outcrops that
207
Zone 4 Zone 3 Zone 2 Zone 1

Magnetic susceptibility Geology
25.0
30
Geometric mean Vein frequency

22.5
Coefficient of variation (x 10)
Altered rock volume (%)

Vein frequency (#/1m)
25 20.0
Arithmetic mean 17.5
Altered rock volume
20
15.0
Coefficient of variation
and
15 12.5
and
10.0
10 7.5
5.0
5
2.5
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Magnetic susceptibility 150% Absolute relative change %

30 140% (ARC) compared to map zone 1
130%
Coefficient of variation (x 10)
Geometric mean 25 120% ARC of geometric mean

110%
Coefficient of variation 100% ARC of coefficient of
20
90% variation
ARC %
80%
15
and
70%
60%
10 50%
40%
30%
5
20%
10%
0 0%
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Distance away from pit margin and Cu mineralization (m)
Fig. 7. Profiles of vein and alteration data, and magnetic susceptibility readings as a function of distance from the pit margin at the Bethlehem study site. Data points
colored by outrop map zone indicated in Fig. 3. Geometric mean uncertainty whiskers correspond to values in Table 2. Altered rock volume = vein fill width plus
visible alteration halo width multiplied by the vein frequency per meter.
Table 3 true for outcrops in the fourth quartile of altered rock volume
Absolute relative change (ARC) of map zones 4, 3 and 2 compared to map zone (> 12.6 vol%; Fig. 10). Each of the altered rock volume populations
1. show an inflection close to 15x10-3SI that likely relates to a switch to
1 vs 4 1 vs 3 1 vs 2 1 vs 1 susceptibility responses dominated by alteration (Fig. 10A).
Hand samples of the least altered host-rocks in the GCB show a wide
−3
Magnetic susceptibility (×10 SI) geometric 34% 21% 15% 0% range of magnetic susceptibilities from the oldest peripheral more mafic
mean ARC%
rocks (units 1–3; Table 5) to the younger centrally located mafic-poor
Geometric CV ARC% 154% 64% 58% 0%
Arithmetic CV ARC% 56% 22% 22% 0% rocks (units 4–6; Table 5; Fig. 10A). The standard deviation of the least
altered rock sample suites also decreases from the marginal mafic facies
ARC% = absolute relative change = ((x-reference value)/reference value)*100. to the inner more felsic facies from ∼20 × 10−3 SI to 5 × 10−3 SI,
respectively. The cumulative frequency curves in Fig. 10A do not dif-
Table 4 ferentiate between host-rock facies, however, the plot can be broken
Standard error associated with magnetic susceptibility measurements into three response domains based on the expected susceptibilities of
(×10−3SI). the least altered samples of the host-rocks:
Susceptibility in ×10−3SI Zone 4 Zone 3 Zone 2 Zone 1
1. fresh rocks with geometric mean > 50 × 10−3 SI;
Mean of Mag. Sus. GeoMeans (n = 10) 19.9 24 25.4 29.8 2. a mix of fresh and altered rocks with susceptibilities between ∼15
Stdev. of means 3.7 1.9 2.6 1.3
Standard Error (SE) 1.2 0.6 0.8 0.4
and 50 × 10−3 SI;
SE at 95% CI (9 DF) 2.6 1.3 1.9 0.9 3. altered rocks and aplite, or leucocratic dikes, that have a low
Uncertainty (error) % of GeoMean Mag. Sus. 13% 6% 7% 3% magnetic susceptibility geometric mean < ∼15 × 10−3 SI.
@ 10 measurements
Uncertainty (error) % of GeoCV. @ 10 18% 13% 11% 12%
Magnetite replacement of primary hornblende or biotite, or as a vein
measurements
precipitate, associated with potassic alteration is very rare at Highland
*Susceptibility in ×10−3SI. Valley (McMillan, 1985; Byrne et al., 2013; Lesage et al., 2016), thus the
Average standard error % of the geometric mean from the 4 map zones = 7.3%. outcrops with > 50 × 10−3 SI susceptibility reflect primary magmatic
t = 2.62 at 95% CI. features and localized increase in Fe-Ti mineral content (D’Angelo, 2016).
Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval; DF = degrees of freedom, GeoCV = Measurements taken on representative rock samples from altered outcrops
geometric coefficient of variation, GeoMean = geometric mean, Mag. Sus. = in the HVC district show that, relative to the least altered protolith, low
magnetic susceptibility, SE = standard error, Stdev. = arithmetic standard deviation magnetic susceptibilities occur in veins and their halos (Fig. 11).
A total of 1160 outcrops with an average of 7.2 magnetic suscept-
sit within the first quartile (< 0.33 vol%) of the altered rock volume ibility measurements per outcrop are included in histogram and cu-
population have the highest magnetic susceptibility geometric mean mulative frequency plots (Fig. 12), and in subsequent spatial
and lowest coefficient of variation response (Fig. 10). The inverse is
208
Zone 1 Zone 2
1.8 1.8
1.6 1.6
1.4 1 - 25th percetile

Log10 magnetic susceptibility (2nd 5 measurement sets)
1.4
of data points
1.2 1.2 26 -100th percetile
of data points
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
Linear trend line
0.6 0.6 for 1:1 releationship
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Zone 3 Zone 4
1.8 1.8
1.6 1.6 Linear trend line Linear trend line

for 26 - 100th for 1 - 100th
1.4 1.4
percentile percentile
1.2 1.2
Zone 1 y = 0.95x + 0.08 y = 0.97x + 0.05
1.0 1.0
Zone 2 y = 1.08x - 0.12 y = 1.13x - 0.19
0.8 0.8
Zone 3 y = 1.09x - 0.16 y = 0.77x + 0.31

0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4 Zone 4 y = 1.05x - 0.07 y = 1.42 x - 0.62
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Log10 magnetic susceptibility (1st 5 measurement sets)
Fig. 8. Minimum-maximum plots for the four map zones. The data has been siloed into the 1st 50 measurements versus the 2nd 50 measurements. The black line
indicates a 1:1 relationship.
100 interpolants (Figs. 13 and 14). Several small inflections in the coeffi-
cient of variation frequency curve are evident (blue arrows; Fig. 12A).
>75th percentile These breaks are used symbolize data and the spatial interpolants.
The data points on a cross-plot of the district outcrop geometric
25 mean and coefficient of variation values form an approximate inverted
U-shape (Fig. 12B). Based on these coefficient of variation and mean
12.5
susceptibility values, and the groupings established in Fig. 10A, they
Altered rock volume%
district outcrop magnetic data can be split into four general response
5 domains (Fig. 12B):
25 - 75th 1. fresh and weakly altered outcrops that have susceptibilities >
percentile
15 × 10−3 SI and a coefficient of variation < 0.395, or 70th percentile
1 of the data (Low CV, High MS);
2. outcrops with high variability and susceptibilities > 15 × 10−3 SI
0.5 (High CV, High MS);
0.33 3. outcrops with high variability and low susceptibilities < 15 × 10−3 SI
0.25 (High CV, Low MS);
<25th 4. outcrops that have both low variability and < 15 × 10−3 SI sus-
percentile
0.1 ceptibility (Low CV, Low MS)
0.05 A high density of outcrops with a coefficient of variation > 0.395

occur around the Valley, Lornex, Highmont, and, to a lesser extent,
0.025 Altered rock Bethlehem porphyry centers compared to elsewhere in the district (green
volume %
and orange symbols; Fig. 13A). There is insufficient outcrop data around
0.01 J.A. and south of Bethlehem to make meaningful inferences in that area.
0.1 1 2 5 10 25 50 75 90 99 99.9 Numerous Cu occurrences, as well as some distal alteration zones, are also
Cumulative frequency (%) associated with outcrops with measurements of a high magnetic coeffi-
cient of variation. The group of low variability and low susceptibility
Fig. 9. Regional outcrop altered rock volume % (log scale) versus their cu-
outcrops can be attributed to fresh host-rocks with atypically low sus-
mulative frequency (probability scale). Percentile breaks and color scheme are
referenced to Fig. 10. n = 743.
ceptibility (e.g. aplite), or pervasively altered outcrops in which in-
sufficient primary magnetite remains to provide higher contrast variability
209
A 100 A
wm-chl 0.91x10-3
Fresh rocks halo
Geometric mean magnetic susceptibility in SI x10-3 50
1+2 ksp
3
4
halo
5
Fresh and altered cp
20 6
10
21.70x10-3 ksp
2 cm
fresh rock
5 Altered rocks
and aplite dikes B
wm-chl-prh ep veinlet
halo 0.15x10-3
2
23.40x10-3
1
ab halo
2 cm fresh rock
0.1 1 2 5 10 25 50 90 99 99.9
Cumulative frequency (%) C prh-pump
B veinlet prh-pump
vein
25.10x10 -3
10
0.23x10-3
Geometric coefficient of varitation
5
fresh rock
prh-ep-wm-chl
halo
2 2 cm
1 Fig. 11. Examples of how veins and alteration change the magnetic suscept-
ibility of the protolith. Susceptibilities were measured at the Geological Survey
0.5 of Canada– Pacific using the Sapphire SI2B susceptibility meter. Measurement
were taken on micro-drill cores taken from representative rock sample blocks.
The rocks slabs in this figure show the approximate location of the measured
0.2 cores. A. Bethsaida granodiorite cross-cut by K-feldspar (ksp) veinlets and halos
with minor chalcopyrite (cp), which are in turn cut by fracture-controlled
sericitic alteration comprising white-mica (wm) and chlorite (chl). B. Skeena
0.1
granodiorite cross-cut by an epidote (ep) vein with an inner albite (ab) halo and
outer halo and outer propylitic halo. C. Pumpellyite (pump)-prehnite (prh)
0.05 veins with propylitic alteration halos in Border quartz diorite.
0.1 1 2 5 10 25 50 75 90 99 99.9
Cumulative frequency (%) Table 5
Median magnetic susceptibility and standard deviation of sub-sampled drill
Altered rock 0.33 to 12.5 Vol. % cores from hand samples of least altered host rocks.
volume % (25-75th percentile)
Host rocks Unit n *Median susceptibility Standard
0 to 0.33 Vol. % 12.5 to 100 Vol. %
number (×10−3SI) deviation
(0-25th percentile) (75-100th percentile)
Fig. 10. Regional outcrop magnetic susceptibility data. A Geometric mean Bethsaida 6 62 20.01 5.58
Skeena 5 17 26.69 8.43
magnetic susceptibility data (log scale) versus cumulative frequency (prob-
Bethlehem 4 11 27.41 10.64
ability scale) symbolized by altered rock volume percentile groups. Orange Chataway 3 17 36.25 15.13
colored dashed lines are the median magnetic susceptibility values for intrusive Guichon 2 49 38.47 7.52
facies in the Guichon batholith (Table 4); older marginal mafic facies = 1, 2 and Border 1 13 40 21.74
3, and inner more felsic facies = 4, 5 and 6. B. Coefficient of variation (log
scale) versus cumulative frequency (probability scale). Outcrop n = 743, and Measured at the Geological Survey of Canada – Pacific using the Sapphire SI2B
measurement n = 6061. (For interpretation of the references to color in this susceptibility meter, which is accurate to 10−7SI. Magnetic susceptibility
figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.) measurements are made on 2.2 cm long cylindrical cores that are 2.5 cm in
diameter, drilled from hand samples.
(Fig. 12B). A cluster of low susceptibility low variability outcrops occurs 5.5. Geostatistical interpolants
southwest of the Cu mineralization outline for Valley, and at Lornex (red
symbols; Fig. 13A). Several additional clusters of low susceptibility low There is a paucity of data from in the Valley and Lornex porphyry
variability outcrops occur in the batholith outboard of the HVC porphyry centers themselves, however, outcrop susceptibility domains less than
centers and Cu occurrences. The spatial and geological context for these ∼10 × 10−3 SI characterize the rocks directly adjacent Cu-miner-
features is discussed below using interpolant maps and location labels. alization (Fig. 13B). Surrounding these susceptibility lows, and
210
A 120 100% surrounded by lower response outcrops evident in the IDW interpolant.
95%
Two orientations are apparent in the kriged interpolant (Fig. 14B); a
Cumulative frequency (%)

90%
100 85% northwest long-axis and a northeast-trending short-axis. Some artefacts
80%
75% are present at the peripheries of the EBK model (e.g. areas marked “e”
70%
80 65% in Fig. 14B), where the extrapolation is at the limit of information and
Frequency
60% the data envelope is one-sided. Additionally, the small anomalous

60 50% coefficient of variation domain situated northeast of Valley is primarily
40% influenced by only one outcrop data point and is subsequently less re-
40
30% liable (c.f. Fig. 14A and B; sample marked “s”).
Anomaly 1, apparent in both coefficient of variation interpolants
20%
20 (Fig. 13C and 14B), is extrapolated to extend under post-mineral volcanic
10%
cover, and is also close to historically mined Cu occurrences (Highland
0 0% and Transvaal; McMillan et al., 2009). Outcrops with low susceptibility
0 0.5 0.75 1 2 3 4
and low variation are also present in the area around anomaly 1.
Coefficient of variation bins Anomaly 2 is associated with a domain of strong fracture controlled al-
B bite alteration, a regional-scale structure, and two minor Cu occurrence
10
(BX and Hat-Outrider; McMillan et al., 2009). Anomaly 3 is hosted in
Coefficient of varitation
mafic-rich rocks at the margin of the batholith and is driven by several

magnetite-destructive, weakly Cu-Zn-mineralized fault zones (Dansey
1 90th
showing; McMillan et al., 2009), and widespread, but low density, epi-
80th dote replacement halos on fractures. Anomaly 4 is at the edge of the
70th
60th batholith at the contact with Nicola volcaniclastic rocks, and appears to
be associated with locally altered rocks in faults at a small Cu occurrence
0.1
(Fidler showing; McMillan et al., 2009). Anomaly 5 refers to a northeast-
trending array of Cu-showings (e.g., Bornite ridge, Malachite Hill, and
Jericho; McMillan et al., 2009) that are spatially associated with loca-
0.02 0.1 1 5 10 30 60 lized susceptibility lows and higher variability outcrops. Anomaly 6 is
Geometric mean
magnetic susceptibility in SI x10-3 associated with several north trending structures associated quartz-sul-
phide veins with well-developed sericite-chlorite halos (Yubet showing;
Low CV, Low MS McMillan et al., 2009). Anomaly 7, south of Yubet, comprises a sus-
ceptibility low and variation high. Mapping in this area indicates the
High CV, Low MS
susceptibility low is caused by porphyry and aplite dikes, and the
High CV, High MS variability high is caused by structurally focused domains of fractures
Fresh and weakly Vector of increasing with sericite-prehnite halos, and subordinate epidote veins with albite
altered vein and alteration intensity
halos (Lesage et al., 2016). Anomaly 8 is primarily a susceptibility low
Fig. 12. A. Histogram and cumulative frequency distribution of regional out- caused by relatively fresh Bethsaida granodiorite which has a lower Mg#
crop magnetic susceptibility coefficient of variation (log scale). The spike than typical for this unit elsewhere in the batholith. The coefficient of
at ∼ 99% is because outcrops with coefficient of variation > 4.1 are included variation high directly west of the susceptibility low at anomaly 8 is
in the same bin range. The blue arrows indicate the percentile breaks used to being influenced by one strongly anomalous outcrop. Anomalies 9
symbolize the data points and geostatistical interpolants shown in Fig. 13. B. (Empire) and 10 (Alwin) are past producing mines that exploited high-
Outcrop geometric mean versus coefficient of variation. The colored boxes in-
grade chalcopyrite-bornite mineralization in quartz-carbonate veins, and
dicate the magnetic response domains based on coefficient of variation and
in sulphide pods hosted in shear zones (McMillan et al., 2009 and re-
susceptibility. Outcrop n = 1610 and measurement n = 11432. (For inter-
ferences there in). Muscovite alteration associated with these Cu-occur-
pretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to
the web version of this article.) rences is restricted to ∼0.1–1 m wide halos around related structures.
6. Discussion
extending for up to 5 km distance from the Valley and Lornex pits, are
domains of high magnetic variability, or a mix of high-and-low varia-
6.1. Alteration and magnetic susceptibilities
bility outcrops (IDW interpolant; Fig. 13C). For ∼5 km southwest of the
Cu mineralization at Valley there is a heterogeneous domain com-
The mean and coefficient of variation of outcrop magnetic sus-
prising high-and-low variability outcrops, beyond which the coefficient
ceptibility measurements can be used to assess alteration intensity in
of variation response is mostly < 0.302 (< 60th percentile value;
the HVC porphyry Cu footprints. Outcrops with a coefficient of varia-
Fig. 13C and 14A). The outcrops east and south of Lornex and High-
tion greater than ∼0.4 and susceptibilities below ∼15 × 10−3 SI have
mont have a more homogenous coefficient of variation response in
a high probability of being altered (e.g., Fig. 12B). Between suscept-
excess of 0.506 (> 75th percentile; Fig. 13C). Small and isolated
ibilities of ∼15 and 40 × 10−3 SI there is a mix of altered and un-
coefficient of variation domains of > 0.772 are associated with Cu oc-
altered rocks that requires sorting by host-rock to differentiate. Subse-
currences and alteration outboard of the porphyry systems (e.g., > 85th
quently, it is the measure of variability that provides a less ambiguous
percentile anomalies labelled 1–10 in Fig. 13C). Overall there is a
proxy for alteration intensity because it is not affected by overlapping
reasonable spatial agreement between mapped propylitic veins and
ranges in protolith susceptibilities. This assertion is supported by the
halos (at > 5 cm/m), ± Na-Ca alteration, which surrounds the por-
observation that the distribution of mapped veins and halos generally
phyry centers, and the outcrop magnetic susceptibility coefficient of
overlaps with the large coefficient of variation anomaly surrounding
variation anomalies (Fig. 13C and 14B). The EBK predictive interpolant
the porphyry centers. Additionally, the magnitude of change in the
detects a broad coefficient of variation anomaly composed of > 0.395
coefficient of variation value of least altered outcrops compared to
(70th percentile value) that overlaps with and extends beyond the
those within ∼4 km of the Valley porphyry center is greater than the
porphyry Cu centers for up to ∼4 km (Fig. 14B). The EBK interpolant is
corresponding change in susceptibilities (Table 6). It is important to
less sensitive to the small isolated coefficient of variation highs
note, however, that in outcrops with a coefficient of variation greater
211
K. Byrne, et al.
630000 645000 630000 645000 630000 645000
A B C
Hig 1
hlan
d fa
1
ult
3 3
Bethlehem 2 2
Valley V
5595000
5595000
10 10 ?
J.A.
Lornex 9 9
5 4 5 4
Highmont 8 8
6 6
Coefficient of
212
variation anomaly
5580000
5580000
Fracture-controlled 7 7
propyltlic ± Na-Ca footprint overlaps
Lornex fault
alteration with mapped
lt alteration
au
e sf
Barn
0 5 0 5 0 5
Kilometers Kilometers Kilometers
630000 645000 630000 645000 630000 645000
Outcrop measurements Outcrop magnetic susceptibility (IDW interpolant) Outcrop geometric coefficient of variation (IDW interpolant)
Cover: anthropogenic, til,
laucustrine, and glaciofluvial Low CV, Low MS 0.02 – 10.12 24.87 – 30.76 Cu occurences 0.000 – 0.302 (0 – 60%ile) 0.610 – 0.772 (80 – 85%ile)
Post-mineral Eocene Kamloops 10.12 – 16.00 30.76 – 40.86 Felsic rock 0.302 – 0.342 (60 – 65%ile) 0.772 – 1.288 (85 – 90%ile)
Group volcanic rocks High CV, Low MS
16.00 – 19.44 40.86 – 58.19 (Bethsaida) contact 0.342 – 0.395 (65 – 70%ile) 1.288 – 2.641 (90 – 95%ile)
Cu mineralization outline High CV, High MS
at porphyry centers 19.44 – 21.44 58.19 – 87.91 Propyltlic ± Na-Ca 0.395 – 0.506 (70 – 75%ile) 2.641 – 4.024 (95 – 97%ile)
Fresh and weakly veins and halos
Fault trace intrepretation altered 21.44 – 24.87 87.91 – 138.91 (~ 5 cm/m) 0.506 – 0.610 (75 – 80%ile) 4.024 – 19.587 (97 –100%ile)
Fig. 13. Magnetic susceptibility domain map and models. A. Outcrop data points symbolized by their coefficient of variation and susceptibility response groups (i.e., Fig. 10), and the distribution of post-mineral cover and
volcanic rocks. B. Inverse distance weighted (IDW) interpolant of outcrop magnetic susceptibility and the location of the Cu occurrences. Letters indicate the porphyry Cu systems in the Highland Valley district:
B = Bethlehem, H = Highmont, J = JA, L = Lornex and V = Valley. C. Inverse distance weighted (IDW) interpolant (displayed as polygons) of outcrop geometric coefficient of variation. Numbers on the maps relate to
anomalies noted in the text Model parameters and additional annotation explanation are given in the main body text. Number of data points (outcrops) shown is 1610. %ile = percentile. Structural interpretation from
Lesage et al. (2016).
630000 645000 630000 645000
A B
Hig
hlan
d fa
e
ult
e
Bethlehem
s e
5595000
5595000
Valley
e
Lornex
Highmont
e
e
5580000
5580000
Lornex fault
Fracture-controlled
propyltlic ± Na-Ca
alteration
lt
fau
rn es
Ba
0 5 0 5
Kilometers Kilometers
630000 645000 630000 645000
Outcrop geometric coefficient of variation data points Outcrop geometric coefficient of variation (EBK interpolant)
0.000 – 0.302 (0 – 60%ile) 0.506 – 0.610 (75 – 80%ile) 2.641 – 4.024 (95 – 97%ile) Fault trace intrepretation
0.302 – 0.342 (60 – 65%ile) 0.610 – 0.772 (80 – 85%ile) 4.024 – 19.587 (97 –100%ile) Cu occurences
0.342 – 0.395 (65 – 70%ile) 0.772 – 1.288 (85 – 90%ile)
Cu mineralization outline Felsic Bethsaida
0.395 – 0.506 (70 – 75%ile) 1.288 – 2.641 (90 – 95%ile) at porphyry centers facies contact
Fig. 14. Data map and model. A. Outcrop data points symbolized by geometric coefficient of variation. B. Empirical Bayesian Kriging (EBK) predictive interpolant
(displayed as polygons) of outcrop coefficient of variation and location of Cu occurrences. Letters indicate the porphyry Cu systems in the Highland Valley district:
B = Bethlehem, H = Highmont, J = J.A., L = Lornex and V = Valley. Model parameters and additional annotation explanation are given in the main body text.
Coefficient of variation data points (outcrops) = 1610. %ile = percentile.
Table 6 between increasing alteration intensity and altered rock volume, and
Absolute relative change (ARC) in magnetic response towards the Valley por- the corresponding outcrop magnetic response can be modeled as an
phyry center. inverted U-shaped vector through magnetic susceptibility and coeffi-
Coefficient of variation cient of variation space (inset in Fig. 12B). This vector has 4 stages:
Distal Proximal ARC 1. incipient fracturing, vein fill, and development of alteration halos
a initially increases outcrop magnetic heterogeneity and coefficient of
0.302 0.506 68%
0.302b 0.772 156% variation without a significant reduction in mean susceptibility;
2. higher fracture density and interconnectivity further increases
Magnetic susceptibility (×10−3SI)
c
Distal Proximal ARC coefficient of variation but also causes a distinct reduction in mean
20 10 50% susceptibility;
20 5 75% 3. a sufficient volume of rock is altered to further reduce the mean
a
susceptibility, but also begin to re-homogenize the magnetic re-
60th to 75th percentile.
b
sponse causing a decrease in coefficient of variation (downward
60th to 85th percentile.
c inflection in the arrow in Fig. 12B);
Least altered Bethsaida outboard of the Valley Cu mineralization.
4. at very high fracture density and when fracture halos overlap
ARC = absolute relative change =( x-reference value)/reference value.
(pervasive alteration), the outcrop has a homogenously low mean
susceptibility, and subsequent low coefficient of variation.
than ∼0.4 and susceptibility between 15 and 40 × 10−3 SI, a sub-
ordinate portion of the dispersion could also be caused by high sus-
ceptibility readings taken over rare magnetite-rich mafic inclusions, as 6.2. Geostatistical interpolants
opposed to lows due to alteration.
Domains of outcrops with elevated coefficient of variation are in- In the GCB, the coefficient of variation of outcrop-scale magnetic
terpreted to be primarily caused by alteration focused in fractures sets susceptibility measurements is a proxy for abundance of fracture-con-
related to cooling in the pluton and permeability generated by the trolled magnetite destructive alteration. When modeled, the coefficient
porphyry Cu systems. Hydrothermal alteration processes, focused in of variation increases towards Cu mineralization and generally corre-
and adjacent to fractures, are interpreted to have decreased host-rock sponds with higher altered rock volume % estimated from mapping. A
susceptibilities by either oxidation of primary magnetite or metaso- larger and more coherent domain of > 75th percentile coefficient of
matic removal of Fe-Ti oxides, or a combination of these processes (e.g., variation is present east of the Lornex and Highmont porphyry centers
Fig. 11; Mitchinson et al., 2013; Riveros et al., 2014). The relationship compared to the area directly west of Valley (Fig. 13C). This disparate
213
response is perhaps a function of alteration facies. The rocks west of Isolated Cu Porphyry Cu Regional
occurence center alteration
Valley are cut by K-feldspar ± chalcopyrite veinlets with narrow
(x10-3 SI)
30
(1–3 mm) K-feldspar halos, and subordinate fractures with sericite-
20
chlorite halo, whereas the areas east and south of Lornex, and northeast 10
of Highmont have a higher abundance of fractures with well-developed
halos of sericite-chlorite, and fractures with albite halos (Lesage et al.,
2016; Byrne et al., 2017). Aeromagnetic data indicates a magnetic low
(C.V)
1.0
over well mineralized and strongly altered portions of the Valley and 0.6
Lornex porphyry centers (Ager et al., 1972; McMillan, 1985). Thus, 0 - 0.2
although there is a paucity of outcrop magnetic data from within the Cu
centers themselves, we infer that they have homogenous and low sus-
ceptibilities, and a corresponding low coefficient of variation.
Northwest and northeast trending coefficient of variation anomalies
are evident in the IDW and EBK interpolants. These trends are con-
sistent with the orientation of Cu mineralization and porphyry dikes in Rock types Vein and alteration facies
the Highland Valley district (Byrne et al., 2013). The interpolants in Porphyry dikes and stocks Propylitic (prh-chl-ep-wm)
Figs. 13 and 14 are unconstrained by lithological or fault boundaries. A Intermediate intrusion Sericitic (wm-chl-cb-qz)
second composite IDW interpolant constrained to major fault block Mafic intrusions Potassic (qz-ms-kfs-bt)
boundaries was also generated (Appendix B), but does not differ sig- Cu mineralization
nificantly from the geologically unconstrained IDW interpolant shown Outcrop magnetic response Magnetic susceptibility
in Fig. 13C. Coefficent of variation -3
(x10 SI)
Fig. 15. Schematic diagram illustrating outcrop magnetic coefficient of varia-

7. Conclusions and implications
tion and susceptibility profiles of the calc-alkalic Cu-(Mo) porphyry systems in
the Highland Valley Copper district. The depicted alteration zonation is mod-
The generation of permeability is critical for ore formation in por- ified from Halley et al (2015). Act = actinolite; bt = biotite; cb = carbonate
phyry systems (Burnham, 1985). Porphyry systems typically form in mineral; chl = chlorite; ep = epidote; kfs = K-feldspar; ms = muscovite
domains of high permeability, as evidence by the localization the por- (coarse grained); prh = prehnite; qz = quartz; wm = fine-grained white-mica
phyry stocks and breccia, a high density of veins, and large volumes of (sericite).
altered rocks associated with mineralization (Sillitoe, 2010, and re-
frences therein). Our work shows that information relating to alteration
Uncertainty in the mean and coefficient of variation values from 10
and vein density can be leveraged from outcrop magnetic susceptibility
susceptibility measurements per ∼10 m2 size outcrop is generally <
data, which can be easily collected at all stages in an exploration pro-
15% in altered rocks. The number of measurements per outcrop should
gramme (Clark et al., 1992). In the HVC district, it is the variation in
be scaled accordingly.
magnetic susceptibility which provides a mappable proxy for paleo-
fluid-flow, a key ore-forming processing, and forms a coherent footprint
outboard of the mineralized centers that can be elucidated through Acknowledgements
statistical analysis.
Domains of outcrops that exhibit coefficient of variation > 0.3 ex- Funding was provided by the Natural Sciences and Engineering
tend 1–4 km away from the porphyry centers at HVC and form a larger Council of Canada (NSERC) and the Canada Mining Innovation Council
footprint than magnetic susceptibility lows. (CMIC) through the NSERC Collaborative Research and Development
Measuring outcrop magnetic susceptibility coefficient of variation Program for which we are grateful. Additionally, we would like to
and mapping the anomalies is a valid method to delineate high varia- thank the Strategic Planning group at Highland Valley Copper and Teck
bility magnetic signal around porphyry Cu systems caused by alteration Resources Limited for sharing their data and their support during the
(Fig. 15), and potentially provides a vector to Cu-mineralization. summer field work periods. This contribution greatly benefited from
Mapping outcrop magnetic susceptibility coefficient of variation edits by Lucas Marshall, Regional Chief Geoscientist at Teck Resources
could be useful data to accompany, and be a proxy for, vein density and Limited, and from constructive reviews by Jim Austin and an anon-
mineral assemblage mapping. Susceptibility variation anomalies should ymous reviewer. NSERC-CMIC Exploration Footprints Network
be reviewed in conjunction with lithological and alteration information Contribution # 151.
in order to differentiate those associated with 1) favorable alteration
facies and 2) mineral vectors towards porphyry mineralization, from 3) Declarations of interest
less prospective regional alteration features (Fig. 15), and 4) localized
increase in primary Fe-Ti mineral concentration. None
Appendix A
Equations used
• x = measurand.
• μ = arithmetic mean or average.
• σ = arithmetic standard deviation.
• μ = geometric mean = x . x . x . .x
g
n 1 2 3 n, which is also equal to the anti-logarithm of the arithmetic mean of the log-transformed distribution
n xi 2
• σ = geometric standard deviation = e

xi = 1 ln
µg ^
g The e and ln functions can be replaced with 10 and log , when log transformation has
. 10 10
n
been used, but the substitution does not affect the σ value. g
• Simple CV = Simple coefficient of variation (relative standard deviation) = CV = . CV is a standardized measure of dispersion of a probability
s
µ
214
distribution or frequency distribution.

• Geometric CV = CV = e 1, where σ is σ (Kirkwood, 1979).
k
ln
g
• Geometric CV = e 1 .
t
2
ln
• Standard error of the mean = SE = , where x̅ = mean of the means, σ is the standard deviation of the means, and n = the number of repeat
x̄
n
mean estimates (repeat measurement sets).
• ARC = absolute relative change = (x-reference value/reference value)*100.
Appendix B
See
Appendix B. Additional IDW interpolants.
215
Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oregeorev.2019.02.015.
References pp. 6–10.

Lapointe, P., Chomyn, B.A., Morris, W.A., Coles, R.L., 1984. Significance of magnetic
susceptibility measurements from the Lac Du Bonnet Batholith, Manitoba, Canada.
Ager, C.A., McMillan, W.J., Ulrych, T.J., 1972. Gravity magnetics and geology of the Geoexploration 22 (3–4), 217–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-7142(84)
Guichon Creek batholith: British Columbia Department of Mines and Petroleum 90013-9.
Resources. Bulletin 62, 31. Lapointe, P., Morris, W.A., Harding, K.L., 1986. Interpretation of magnetic susceptibility:
Aitchison, J., Brown, J.A.C., 1957. The Log-Normal Distribution. Cambridge University a new approach to geophysical evaluation of the degree of rock alteration: Canadian.
Press, Cambridge (UK). J. Earth Sci. 23, 393–401.
Austin, J.R., Foss, C.A., 2014. The Paradox of Scale: reconciling magnetic anomalies with Latham, A.G., Harding, K.L., Lapointe, P., Morris, W.A., Balch, S.J., 1989. On the log-
rock magnetic properties for cost-effective mineral exploration. J. Appl. Geophys. normal distribution of oxides in igneous rocks, using magnetic susceptibility as a
104, 121–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2014.02.018. proxy for oxide mineral concentration. Geophys. J. Int. 96 (1), 179–184. https://doi.
Austin, J., Patterson, B., Walshe, J., Gazley, M., 2017, Integrating knowledge from org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.1989.tb05259.x.
structural, geochemical and petrophysical analyses at sample to regional scales: new Lee, M.D., Morris, W.A., 2013. Comparison of magnetic-susceptibility meters using rock
insights into Mount Isa Eastern Succession., Preview, February 2017, pp.32–35 samples from the Wopmay Orogen, Northwest Territories, Canada. Geological Survey
https://www.publish.csiro.au/pv/pdf/PVv2017n186p32. of Canada, Technical Note 5, 7.
Behn, G., Camus, F., Carrasco, P., Ware, H., 2001. Aeromagnetic signature of porphyry Lee, M., Morris, W., Ugalde, H., 2010. Mapping of apparent magnetic susceptibility and
copper systems in northern Chile and its geologic implications. Econ. Geol. 96 (2), the identification of fractures: a case study from the Eye-Dashwa Lakes pluton,
239–248. https://doi.org/10.2113/gsecongeo.96.2.239. Atikokan, Ontario. Geophysics 75 (3), B147–B156. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.
Burnham, W.C., 1985. Energy release in subvolcanic environments: implications for 3427636.
breccia formation. Econ. Geol. 80, 1515–1522. Lesage, G., Byrne, K., Lypaczewski, P., Lee, R.G., Hart, C.J.R., 2016, Characterizing the
Byrne, K., Lesage, G., Gleeson, S.A., and Lee, R.G., 2017, Large-Scale Sodic-Calcic district-scale alteration surrounding a large porphyry Cu system: The footprint of
Alteration Around Porphyry Copper Systems: Examples from the Highland Valley Highland Valley Copper, British Columbia, in GAC-MAC Abstracts, June 1–3, 2016, v.
Copper District, Guichon Batholith, South-Central British Columbia: Geoscience BC 39, Whitehorse, Yukon, pp. 52.
Summary of Activities 2016, pp. 213–222. Lesage, G., Byrne, K., Morris, W.A., Enkin, R.J., Lee, R.G., Mir, R., Hart, C.J.R., 2019.
Byrne, K., Stock, E., Ryan, J., Johnson, C., Nisenson, J., Alva-Jimenez, T., Lapointe, M., Interpreting regional 3D fault networks from integrated geological and geophysical
Stewart, H., Grubisa, G., Sykora, S., 2013. In: Logan, J.M., Schroeter, T. (Eds.), data sets: an example from the Guichon Creek batholith, British Columbia. J. Struct.
Porphyry Cu-(Mo) deposits in the Highland Valley District, South Central British Geol. 119, 93–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2018.12.007.
Columbia. Society of Economic Geologists, Guidebook Series, v. 44, Society of Lesher, M., Hannington, M., Galley, A., Ansdell, K., Astic, T., Banerjee, N., Beauchamp, S.,
Economic Geologists, pp. 99–116. Beaudoin, G., Bertelli, M., Bérubé, C., Beyer, S., Blacklock, N., Byrne, K., Cheng, L.Z.,
Clark, D.A., 2014. Magnetic effects of hydrothermal alteration in porphyry copper and et al., 2017. Integrated Multi-Parameter Exploration Footprints of the Canadian
iron-oxide copper-gold systems: a review. 624–625, p. 46–65. Tectonophysics v. Malartic Disseminated Au, McArthur River-Millennium Unconformity U, and
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2013.12.011. Highland Valley Porphyry Cu Deposits: Preliminary Results from the NSERC-CMIC
Clark, D.A., 1999. Magnetic petrology of igneous intrusions: implications for exploration Mineral Exploration Footprints Resea. In: Tschirhart, V., Thomas, M.D. (Eds.),
and magnetic interpretation. Explor. Geophys. 30 (2), 5–26. https://doi.org/10. Proceedings of Exploration 17: Sixth Decennial International Conference on Mineral
1071/EG999005. Exploration, pp. 325–347.
Clark, D.A., French, D.H., Lackie, M.A., Schmidt, P.W., 1992. Magnetic petrology: ap- Limpert, E., Stahel, W.A., Abbt, M., 2001. Log-normal distributions across the sciences:
plication of integrated rock magnetic and petrological techniques to geological in- keys and clues. Bioscience 51 (5), 341–352.
terpretation of magnetic surveys. Explor. Geophys. 23 (2), 65. https://doi.org/10. Logan, J.M., Mihalynuk, M.G., 2014. Tectonic controls on early Mesozoic paired alkaline
1071/EG992065. porphyry deposit belts (Cu-Au ± Ag-Pt-Pd-Mo) within the Canadian Cordillera.
Coney, P.J., Jones, D.L., Monger, J.W.H., 1980. Cordilleran suspect terranes. Nature v. Econ. Geol. 109 (4), 827–858. https://doi.org/10.2113/econgeo.109.4.827.
288, 329–333. McMillan, W.J., 1976. Geology and genesis of the Highland Valley ore deposits and the
D’Angelo, M., 2016. Geochemistry, petrography and mineral chemistry of the Guichon Guichon Creek batholith. In: Southerland Brown, A. (Ed.), Porphyry Deposits of the
Creek and Nicola batholiths, southcentral British Columbia Michael. M.Sc. Thesis. Canadian Cordillera. Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, pp. 85–104.
Lakehead University, pp. 435. McMillan, W.J., 1985. Geology and ore deposits of the Highland Valley camp. In: Sinclair,
D’Angelo, M., Alfaro, M., Hollings, P., Byrne, K., Piercey, S., Creaser, R.A., 2017. A.J. (Ed.), Field, Guide and Reference Manual Series. Geological Association of
Petrogenesis and magmatic evolution the Guichon Creek Batholith: Implications for Canada.
the Highland Valley porphyry Cu ± (Mo) district, southcentral British Columbia. McMillan, W.J., Anderson, R.G., Chen, R., Chen, W., 2009. Geology and mineral occur-
Econ. Geol. 112, 1857–1888. https://doi.org/10.5382/econgeo.2017.4532. rences (MINFILE), the Guichon Creek batholith and Highland Valley porphyry copper
Deng, D.N., 2015. A comparative study of hand-held magnetic susceptibility instruments: district, British Columbia: Open file 6079. Geological Survey of Canada pp. 2.
Laurentian University 207. Mitchinson, D.E., Enkin, R.J., Hart, C.J.R., 2013, Linking Porphyry Deposit Geology to
ESRI, 2017, 3D Analysts toolbox: How IDW works: Arc Map 10.3, pp. 1. Geophysics via Physical Properties: Adding Value to Geoscience BC Geophysical
Fournier, R.O., 1999. Hydrothermal processes related to movement of fluid from plastic Data: Geoscience BC Report 2013-14, pp. 116.
into brittle rock in the magmatic-epithermal environment. Econ. Geol. 94 (8), Nabighian, M.N., Grauch, V.J.S., Hansen, R.O., Lafehr, T.R., Li, Y., Peirce, J.W., Phillips,
1193–1211. https://doi.org/10.2113/gsecongeo.94.8.1193. J.D., Ruder, M.E., 2005. 75th Anniversary The historical development of the mag-
Gettings, M.E., Bultman, M.W., 2014, Magnetic susceptibility data for some exposed netic method in exploration. Geophysics 70 (6), 33–61. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.
bedrock in the western conterminous United States: Data Series 804, U.S. Geological 2133784.
Survey, pp. 5. Nelson, J.L., Colpron, M., Israel, S., 2013. The Cordillera of British Columbia, Yukon, and
Halley, S.W., Dilles, J.H., Tosdal, R.M., 2015. Footprints: hydrothermal alteration and Alaska: Tectonics and Metallogeny. In: Colpron, M., Bissig, T., Rusk, B.G., Thompson,
geochemical dispersion around porphyry copper deposits. SEG Newsletter (100), J.F.H. (Eds.), Tectonics, Metallogeny, and Discovery-the North American Cordillera
12–17. and similar accretionary settings. Society of Economic Geologists, Special
Holden, E.J., Fu, S.C., Kovesi, P., Dentith, M., Bourne, B., Hope, M., 2011. Automatic Publication, pp. 53–109.
identification of responses from porphyry intrusive systems within magnetic data Northcote, K.E., 1969, Geology and geochronology of the Guichon Creek batholith:
using image analysis. J. Appl. Geophys. 74 (4), 255–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Bulletin 56, British Columbia Department of Mines and Petroleum Resources, vol. 56,
jappgeo.2011.06.016. pp. 77.
Holliday, J.R., Cooke, D.R., 2007, Advances in Geological Models and Exploration Oldenburg, D., Pratt, D.A., 2007, Geophysical inversion for mineral exploration: A decade
Methods for Copper ± Gold Porphyry Deposits, in Proceedings of Exploration 07: of progress in theory and practice, in Proceedings of Exploration 07: Fifth Decennial
Fifth Decennial International Conference on Mineral Exploration, pp. 791–809. International Conference on Mineral Exploration, pp. 61–95.
Hollister, V.F., Allen, J.M., Anzalone, S.A., Seraphim, R.H., 1975. Structural evolution of Reeves, C., 2005. Aeromagnetic Surveys. Principles, Practice & Interpretation.
porphyry mineralization at Highland Valley, British Columbia. Canad. J. Earth Sci. Earthworks, Geosoft.
12, 807–820. Riveros, K., Veloso, E., Campos, E., Menzies, A., Véliz, W., 2014. Magnetic properties
Hoover, D.B., Klein, D.P., Campbell, D.C., 1994. Geophysical methods in exploration and related to hydrothermal alteration processes at the Escondida porphyry copper de-
mineral environmental investigations. Field Geophysics 53 (9), 1689–1699. https:// posit, northern Chile. Mineral. Depos. 49 (6), 693–707. https://doi.org/10.1007/
doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004. s00126-014-0514-7.
Hrouda, F., Chulapacova, M., Chadima, M., 2009. Terraplus: the use of magnetic sus- Seedorff, E., Dilles, J.H., Proffett, J.M., Einaudi, M.T., Zurcher, L., Stavast, W.J.A.,
ceptibility of rocks in geological exploration. Terraplus, Geophysical Equipment Johnson, D.A., Barton, M.D., 2005. Porphyry Deposits: Characteristics and Origin of
Supplier 25, p. Hypogene Features. In: Hedenquist, J.W., Thompson, J.F.H., Goldfarb, R.J., Richards,
Kirkwood, T.B.L., 1979. Geometric means and measures of dispersion. Biometrics 35 (4), J.P. (Eds.), Economic Geology 100th Anniversary Volume. Society of Economic
908–909. Geologists, pp. 251–298.
Krivoruchko, K., 2012, Empirical Bayesian Kriging: ArcUser 15, ESRI Press, v. Fall 2012, Sillitoe, R.H., 2013. Metallogenic and regulatory inequalities around the Northern Pacific
216
rim: Implications for discovery. Geoscience for Discovery. Society of Economic Geoprocessing v. 2, 315–327.
Geologists, Whistler, Whistler, British Columbia. Weis, P., 2016. The dynamic interplay between saline fluid flow and rock permeability in
Sillitoe, R.H., 2010. Porphyry copper systems. Econ. Geol. 105 (1), 3–41. https://doi.org/ magmatic-hydrothermal systems. Crustal Permeability 373–392. https://doi.org/10.
10.2113/gsecongeo.105.1.3. 1002/9781119166573.ch29.
Tapia, J., Townley, B., Córdova, L., Poblete, F., Arriagada, C., 2016. Hydrothermal al- Ydon, J.W., 2007. An overview of the economic and geological contexts of Canada’s
teration and its effects on the magnetic properties of Los Pelambres, a large multi- major mineral deposit typesMineral Deposits of Canada: A Synthesis of Major
stage porphyry copper deposit. J. Appl. Geophys. 132, 125–136. https://doi.org/10. Deposit-Types, District Metallogeny, the Evolution of Geological Provinces, and
1016/j.jappgeo.2016.07.005. Exploration Methods. Geological Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division,
Watson, D.F., Philip, G.M., 1985. A refinement of inverse distance weighted interpolation. Special Publication No. 5, pp. 3–48.
217

Byrne, Mag Susc Mapping Et Al 2019 Ore Geology Reviews

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Byrne, Mag Susc Mapping Et Al 2019 Ore Geology Reviews

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Byrne, Mag Susc Mapping Et Al 2019 Ore Geology Reviews

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ore Geology Reviews 107 (2019) 201–217

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ore Geology Reviews

Variability of outcrop magnetic susceptibility and its relationship to the T

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Theoretical magnetic intensity profiles A Kamloops

Vein and alteration facies

Advanced argillic Potassic (magnetite-bearing)

Propylitic Sodic-calcic Simplified

The host-rocks to porphyry Cu systems are commonly andesitic

Alkali depletion, quartz addition

Bulk magnetic susceptibility in igneous rocks has a lognormal dis-

albite epidote halo tourmaline fill

10 5.4.1. Estimation of altered rock volume from mapping data

Zone 4 Zone 3 Zone 2 Zone 1

Magnetic susceptibility (x 10-3 SI)

Coefficient of variation (x 10)

Altered rock volume (%)

Magnetic susceptibility 150% Absolute relative change %

Geometric mean 25 120% ARC of geometric mean

Distance away from pit margin and Cu mineralization (m)

1.4 1 - 25th percetile

1.6 1.6 Linear trend line Linear trend line

Zone 3 y = 1.09x - 0.16 y = 0.77x + 0.31

0.4 0.4 Zone 4 y = 1.05x - 0.07 y = 1.42 x - 0.62

Log10 magnetic susceptibility (1st 5 measurement sets)

0.05 A high density of outcrops with a coefficient of variation > 0.395

Cumulative frequency (%)

60% the data envelope is one-sided. Additionally, the small anomalous

mafic-rich rocks at the margin of the batholith and is driven by several

630000 645000 630000 645000 630000 645000

Kilometers Kilometers Kilometers

630000 645000 630000 645000 630000 645000

630000 645000 630000 645000

630000 645000 630000 645000

Fig. 15. Schematic diagram illustrating outcrop magnetic coefficient of varia-

• σ = geometric standard deviation = e

distribution or frequency distribution.

Appendix B. Additional IDW interpolants.

Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oregeorev.2019.02.015.

References pp. 6–10.

You might also like