Are Your Data Good Enough: A Checklist for Mining Prospects

This checklist is intended to help geologists collect or review geological data on mining prospects in a manner that will conform to the increasingly stringent reporting requirements. Survey, assay, and geological data are the key initial inputs required to build a robust computer-based resource model. Once the resource model is built, a geologist reviewing the model should understand the methods and assumptions used in interpolating from the initial data to the gridded resource model. Closer cooperation between project geologists and resource modellers should improve the way data are collected initially as well as identifying biases, weakness and inconsistencies within the resource model. SOMMAIRE Voici une liste de vérification à l'intention des géologues qui ont à collecter et analyser les données de gisements minéraux, liste qui leur permettra de se conformer aux normes de compte rendu de plus en plus strictes. Les données de levés, de teneur et de géologie constituent les éléments clés initiaux indispensables pour l'élaboration d'un modèle informatisé de la ressource fiable. Le modèle de ressource retenu doit permettre au géologue de comprendre la méthode suivie ainsi que les hypothèses d'interpolation appliquées aux données initiales conduisant au modèle matriciel de la ressource. Une meilleure collaboration entre les géologues de projet et les modélisateurs de la ressource devrait permettre d'améliorer la qualité des données initiales collectées et de repérer les biais, faiblesses et incongruités du modèle de la ressource

Exploration History and Mineral Potential of the Central Arctic Zn-Pb District, Nunavut

Exploration in the central Arctic Zn-Pb District took place in five phases: 1) an initial exploration period (1960–70), during which most surface showings on Cornwallis and Little Cornwallis islands were found; 2) a discovery period (1971–79), during which the buried Polaris ore body was discovered and its feasibility and viability established, new showings were found farther afield, and many showings received limited drill testing; 3) the production period (1980–88), dominated by drilling at Polaris Mine; 4) an ore-replacement exploration period (1989–2001), during which showings close to Polaris were extensively drilled, showings on Cornwallis Island drill tested, and new showings found and drilled farther away; and 5) a reclamation period (2002–05), during which the infrastructure was removed and the mine site restored. Factors affecting the timing and rate of exploration were generally intrinsic to the region: 1) discovery of showings in 1960, 2) discovery of the Polaris ore body in 1971, 3) declining reserves between 1989 and 2002, 4) closure of the mine in 2002, 5) the short exploration season and difficult logistics, and 6) lack of competition. The external drivers of exploration were 1) oil-related exploration that led to the discovery of the Polaris showings, 2) the onset of regional exploration coinciding with spikes in the price of zinc, and 3) the surge in scientific interest in carbonate-hosted Zn-Pb deposits in 1967. Probabilistic, discovery-time curve analysis indicates that over 50 showings remain undiscovered. Because logistics controlled the target selection, the standard assumption of a logical discovery process (from largest target to smallest target) is likely invalid. This means that large, untested targets may still exist in the district.Les travaux d’exploration dans le district de Zn-Pb du centre de l’Arctique se sont déroulés en cinq étapes : 1) une période d’exploration initiale (1960 - 1970), durant laquelle la plupart des traces détectées sur l’île Cornwallis et la Petite île Cornwallis ont été trouvées; 2) une période de découverte (1971- 1979), pendant laquelle la zone de minéralisation enterrée de Polaris a été découverte et sa faisabilité et sa rentabilité ont été déterminées, de nouvelles traces ont été décelées plus au loin, et de nombreuses traces ont fait l’objet d’un nombre restreint d’essais de foration; 3) une période de production (1980-1988), dominée par les travaux de foration à la mine Polaris; 4) une période d’exploration de remplacement de minerai (1989- 2001), dans le cadre de laquelle les traces situées à proximité de Polaris ont fait l’objet de forations intenses, les traces de l’île Cornwallis ont fait l’objet d’essais et de nouvelles traces ont été découvertes et forées plus loin; et 5) une période de remise en état (2002-2005), durant laquelle l’infrastructure a été retirée et l’emplacement de la mine a été restauré. Généralement, les facteurs touchant la programmation et le régime d’exploration étaient intrinsèques à la région : 1) la découverte des traces en 1960, 2) la découverte du corps minéralisé de Polaris en 1971, 3) la diminution des réserves entre 1989 et 2002, 4) la fermeture de la mine en 2002, 5) la courte saison d’exploration et la logistique qui présentait des difficultés, et 6) l’absence de concurrence. Les motifs externes à l’exploration étaient les suivants : 1) l’exploration pétrolière qui a engendré la découverte des traces de Polaris, 2) le début de l’exploration régionale qui coïncidait avec les variations brusques du prix du zinc, et 3) l’intérêt soudain, dans le monde scientifique, envers les gisements de Zn-Pb dans la roche hôte carbonatée en 1967. L’analyse probabiliste de la courbe de découverte par rapport au temps indique que plus d’une cinquantaine de traces n’ont toujours pas été découvertes. Puisque la logistique décidait du choix des cibles, il est très vraisemblable que l’hypothèse standard d’un processus de découverte logique (de la cible la plus grande à la cible la plus petite) ne soit pas valable. Cela signifie que de vastes cibles n’ayant pas fait l’objet d’essais existent encore dans le district

Extensive Lower Cretaceous (Albian) methane seepage on Ellef Ringnes Island, Canadian High Arctic

During field mapping of Ellef Ringnes Island, Canadian Arctic Archipelago, 139 isolated Lower Cretaceous methane seep deposits were found from 75 field sites. Stable isotopes of the carbonates have values of δ13C= -47‰ to -35‰ and δ18O= -4.0‰ to +0.7‰. Isoprenoids in organics from one of the seeps are significantly depleted in 13C, with the most negative δ13C of = -118 ‰ and -113 ‰ for PMI and phytane/crocetane, respectively. These values indicate an origin through methane oxidation, consistent with biomarkers that are characteristic for anaerobic methanotrophic archaea within the seep deposits, accompanied by terminally-branched fatty acids sourced by sulphate-reducing bacteria, showing similar 13C values (-92‰). The seep deposits contain a moderate diversity macrofaunal assemblage containing ammonites, bivalves, gastropods, scaphopods, ‘vestimentiferan’ worm tubes and brachiopods. The assemblage is dominated numerically by species that probably had chemosymbionts. The seep deposits formed in the subsurface with strong redox zones, in an otherwise normal marine setting, characterised by oxic waters at high paleolatitudes. While geographically widespread, over an area of ~10,000 km2, seep deposits on Ellef Ringnes Island occur in a narrow stratigraphic horizon, suggesting a large release of biogenic methane occurred over a brief period of time. This gas release was coincident with a transition from a cold to warm climate during the latest Early Albian, and we hypothetize that this may relate to gas hydrate release

Fludarabine, cytarabine, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, and idarubicin with gemtuzumab ozogamicin improves event-free survival in younger patients with newly diagnosed aml and overall survival in patients with npm1 and flt3 mutations

Purpose To determine the optimal induction chemotherapy regimen for younger adults with newly diagnosed AML without known adverse risk cytogenetics. Patients and Methods One thousand thirty-three patients were randomly assigned to intensified (fludarabine, cytarabine, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, and idarubicin [FLAG-Ida]) or standard (daunorubicin and Ara-C [DA]) induction chemotherapy, with one or two doses of gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Results There was no difference in remission rate after two courses between FLAG-Ida + GO and DA + GO (complete remission [CR] + CR with incomplete hematologic recovery 93% v 91%) or in day 60 mortality (4.3% v 4.6%). There was no difference in OS (66% v 63%; P = .41); however, the risk of relapse was lower with FLAG-Ida + GO (24% v 41%; P < .001) and 3-year event-free survival was higher (57% v 45%; P < .001). In patients with an NPM1 mutation (30%), 3-year OS was significantly higher with FLAG-Ida + GO (82% v 64%; P = .005). NPM1 measurable residual disease (MRD) clearance was also greater, with 88% versus 77% becoming MRD-negative in peripheral blood after cycle 2 (P = .02). Three-year OS was also higher in patients with a FLT3 mutation (64% v 54%; P = .047). Fewer transplants were performed in patients receiving FLAG-Ida + GO (238 v 278; P = .02). There was no difference in outcome according to the number of GO doses, although NPM1 MRD clearance was higher with two doses in the DA arm. Patients with core binding factor AML treated with DA and one dose of GO had a 3-year OS of 96% with no survival benefit from FLAG-Ida + GO. Conclusion Overall, FLAG-Ida + GO significantly reduced relapse without improving OS. However, exploratory analyses show that patients with NPM1 and FLT3 mutations had substantial improvements in OS. By contrast, in patients with core binding factor AML, outcomes were excellent with DA + GO with no FLAG-Ida benefit

Late Ordovician And Early Silurian Strophomenid Brachiopods From Anticosti Island, Quebec

Thirty-three species of strophomenid brachiopods, seven of them new, belonging to 23 genera are used to establish six biozones on Anticosti Island, two in the Vaureal Formation, one in the Ellis Bay Formation, a barren zone through much of the Becscie Formation, a biozone encompassing the uppermost Becscie Formation, Merrimack and Gun River formations, and one in each of the Jupiter and Chicotte formations. These faunas fall into two biogeographic assemblages. Species present in the Vaureal Formation are part of a high-diversity fauna endemic to North America. Species in the Ellis Bay to Chicotte formations are found only on Anticosti, or have Baltic affinities, and are part of a fauna with geographically widespread genera. Maximum faunal replacement occurred at the base of the Ellis Bay Formation, and not at the Ordovician-Silurian boundary.;Fibrous microstructure occurs in the plectambonitids, laminar microstructure in all other strophomenids. Granular calcite occurs in coarse taleolae, wedge-shaped socket plates, muscle scars, and stropheodontid denticles. Shell microstructure varies with other morphological features. Those species with coarse, blocky calcite, taleolate pseudopunctae always have wedge-shaped socket plates. Those species lacking coarse pseudopunctae, but with either fine taleolae, or lacking pseudopunctae altogether, always have curved, concave-up socket plates. It is herein proposed that those groups with wedge-shaped socket ridges (Rafinesquinidae, Leptaenidae, chonetids, and the stropheodontids) had a single common ancestor, and that there was a common ancestor for the Strophomenidae and Orthotetoidea. The fibrous shelled plectambonitids form a group to themselves, with no clear link to other strophomenids.;Muscle attachment pads in the delthyrial cavity correspond to the positions of neither the adductor nor diductor muscle scars; pedicle adjustor muscles in modern brachiopods occupy this position. The circular gap between the median fold of the pseudodeltidium and groove on chilidium is proposed as the point of emergence of the pedicle. The tiny foramen, commonly sealed early in growth, is suggested to be part of a water-intake system used to open the valves, active early in ontogeny before the growth of the cardinal process. Once the cardinal process appeared, the foramen was sealed

Investigating the Paleozoic-Mesozoic low-temperature thermal history of the southwestern Canadian Arctic: insights from (U-Th)/He thermochronology

The Arctic Amerasia Basin, located between the Canadian margin and Alaska, formed by purported Jurassic–Cretaceous rifting related to the rotation of the Arctic Alaska – Chukotka microcontinent from northern Laurentia. Rifting may have been accompanied by rift shoulder uplift and cooling that is recorded in low-temperature thermochronometers. Furthermore, the southwestern Canadian Arctic has a widespread Devonian–Cretaceous unconformity with a poorly understood burial-unroofing history. We evaluate new zircon (U–Th)/He thermochronology (ZHe) and organic maturity (vitrinite reflectance (VRo)) data from Neoproterozoic strata of the Amundsen Basin, Cambrian strata of the Arctic Platform, and Devonian strata of the Franklinian Basin to help resolve the sedimentary thickness deposited and eroded during the time represented by the regional unconformity. ZHe and VRo models identify the thermal maximum occurring between the late Paleozoic – Mesozoic interval. Proximal to the rifted Canadian margin, models estimate 3.7–4.5 km of deposition between the Devonian–Cretaceous, in marked contrast to <1 km towards the craton. Jurassic–Cretaceous exhumation is estimated at 2.3–3.5 km and is more uniform across the region. Although the magnitude of burial and erosion can be resolved by modelling, the timing of these events cannot be elucidated with confidence. The thermochronology models can be satisfied by either (1) late Paleozoic – early Mesozoic burial with a thermal maximum prior to Jurassic rifting, followed by cooling; or (2) Late Devonian maximum burial, with gradual unroofing until Cretaceous sedimentation. Although continued deposition into the Mesozoic towards the craton interior seems unlikely, it remains possible that there was continued deposition proximal to the rifted Canadian margin.The accepted manuscript in pdf format is listed with the files at the bottom of this page. The presentation of the authors' names and (or) special characters in the title of the manuscript may differ slightly between what is listed on this page and what is listed in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript; that in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript is what was submitted by the author