Jiaoxi
About 30 km north-east of Gar, Ngari, Tibet (western Lhasa terrane), China
Other hydrothermalW
- Type
- Granite-related wolframite-quartz veins
First Miocene (about 13 Ma) tungsten deposit found in the Shiquan-Nam Tso mélange zone: wolframite veins in shales and granites (muscovite granite, biotite monzogranite). Three stages (oxide, sulfide, fluorite). Wolframite deposited at about 340 to 380 °C, at about 6 km depth, by dilution and cooling of a low-salinity magmatic fluid mixed with meteoric water, whose share grows towards the fluorite stage. Indicative coordinates.
δ18O in ‰ (per mil) Values of the same system
Standard : V-SMOW
| Value | Range | n | Mineral or matrix | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16.4 ± 2 ‰ | 13.8 / 19.5 ‰ | 17 | oxide-stage quartz (wolframite) Mean and standard deviation recalculated from 17 samples, Table 5. Calculated fluid from 8.5 to 14.2 ‰ at 362 °C: magmatic. | Wang et al. (2021), Constraining the genesis of tungsten mineralization in the Jiaoxi dep… |
| 5.7 ± 0.6 ‰ | 5.2 / 7.2 ‰ | 9 | oxide-stage wolframite Mean and standard deviation recalculated from 9 samples, Table 5. Quartz-wolframite thermometry: 338 to 375 °C. | Wang et al. (2021), Constraining the genesis of tungsten mineralization in the Jiaoxi dep… |
| 14.6 ± 1.1 ‰ | 13.4 / 15.4 ‰ | 3 | sulfide-stage quartz Mean and standard deviation recalculated from 3 samples, Table 5. | Wang et al. (2021), Constraining the genesis of tungsten mineralization in the Jiaoxi dep… |
| 3.9 ± 1.8 ‰ | 2.1 / 5.7 ‰ | 3 | fluid inclusion water in fluorite (late stage), direct measurement Mean and standard deviation recalculated from 3 samples, Table 5. Lighter: growing share of meteoric water. | Wang et al. (2021), Constraining the genesis of tungsten mineralization in the Jiaoxi dep… |
δD in ‰ (per mil) Values of the same system
Standard : V-SMOW
| Value | Range | n | Mineral or matrix | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| −78.6 ± 8.9 ‰ | −88.2 / −60.7 ‰ | 17 | fluid inclusion water in oxide-stage quartz Mean and standard deviation recalculated from 17 samples, Table 5. | Wang et al. (2021), Constraining the genesis of tungsten mineralization in the Jiaoxi dep… |
| −80.3 ± 4.9 ‰ | −85.9 / −77.1 ‰ | 3 | fluid inclusion water in sulfide-stage quartz Mean and standard deviation recalculated from 3 samples, Table 5. | Wang et al. (2021), Constraining the genesis of tungsten mineralization in the Jiaoxi dep… |
| −66.7 ± 8 ‰ | −75.2 / −59.3 ‰ | 3 | fluid inclusion water in fluorite (late stage) Mean and standard deviation recalculated from 3 samples, Table 5. | Wang et al. (2021), Constraining the genesis of tungsten mineralization in the Jiaoxi dep… |
δ34S in ‰ (per mil) Values of the same system
Standard : V-CDT
| Value | Range | n | Mineral or matrix | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.1 ± 0.4 ‰ | 2.5 / 3.7 ‰ | 9 | sulfides of the oxide and sulfide stages (pyrite, pyrrhotite, chalcopyrite) Mean and standard deviation recalculated from 9 samples, Table 4. Magmatic sulfur. | Wang et al. (2021), Constraining the genesis of tungsten mineralization in the Jiaoxi dep… |
206Pb/204Pb isotope ratio, no unit Values of the same system
Standard : NIST SRM 981
| Value | Range | n | Mineral or matrix | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18.546 ± 0.284 | 17.866 / 18.712 | 9 | sulfides (pyrite, chalcopyrite, pyrrhotite) Mean and standard deviation recalculated from 9 samples, Table 6. Chalcopyrite and pyrrhotite less radiogenic than pyrite. | Wang et al. (2021), Constraining the genesis of tungsten mineralization in the Jiaoxi dep… |
| 18.752 ± 0.041 | 18.693 / 18.789 | 4 | coeval granites (muscovite granite, biotite monzogranite, whole rock) Mean and standard deviation recalculated from 4 samples, Table 6. Close to the sulfides: metals derived from the granites. | Wang et al. (2021), Constraining the genesis of tungsten mineralization in the Jiaoxi dep… |
207Pb/204Pb isotope ratio, no unit Values of the same system
Standard : NIST SRM 981
| Value | Range | n | Mineral or matrix | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15.685 ± 0.061 | 15.555 / 15.743 | 9 | sulfides (pyrite, chalcopyrite, pyrrhotite) Mean and standard deviation recalculated from 9 samples, Table 6. Chalcopyrite and pyrrhotite less radiogenic than pyrite. | Wang et al. (2021), Constraining the genesis of tungsten mineralization in the Jiaoxi dep… |
| 15.695 ± 0.008 | 15.686 / 15.704 | 4 | coeval granites (muscovite granite, biotite monzogranite, whole rock) Mean and standard deviation recalculated from 4 samples, Table 6. Close to the sulfides: metals derived from the granites. | Wang et al. (2021), Constraining the genesis of tungsten mineralization in the Jiaoxi dep… |
208Pb/204Pb isotope ratio, no unit Values of the same system
Standard : NIST SRM 981
| Value | Range | n | Mineral or matrix | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 39.001 ± 0.467 | 37.935 / 39.335 | 9 | sulfides (pyrite, chalcopyrite, pyrrhotite) Mean and standard deviation recalculated from 9 samples, Table 6. Chalcopyrite and pyrrhotite less radiogenic than pyrite. | Wang et al. (2021), Constraining the genesis of tungsten mineralization in the Jiaoxi dep… |
| 39.197 ± 0.047 | 39.157 / 39.264 | 4 | coeval granites (muscovite granite, biotite monzogranite, whole rock) Mean and standard deviation recalculated from 4 samples, Table 6. Close to the sulfides: metals derived from the granites. | Wang et al. (2021), Constraining the genesis of tungsten mineralization in the Jiaoxi dep… |
Deposits of the same type
- Luobugaizi China
- Jigongcun China
- Zhaxikang China
- Ustarasai Uzbekistan
- Mushiston Tadjikistan
- West Xiaodushan China
- Juyuan China
- Lapas Uzbekistan
Cite this page
IsoFind Atlas (2026). Jiaoxi, isotope signatures. https://www.isofind.tech/isotopes/en/deposits/jiaoxi/ (accessed 2026-10-13).
@misc{isofind2026jiaoxiisotopesignatures,
title = {Jiaoxi, isotope signatures},
author = {{IsoFind Atlas}},
year = {2026},
url = {https://www.isofind.tech/isotopes/en/deposits/jiaoxi/},
note = {Accessed 2026-10-13}
}Updated : 2026-10-13