Detailed mapping and reevaluation of biostratigraphic data provide new insights into the regional stratigraphic significance of the Ordovician Comus Formation at its type locality at Iron Point, Edna Mountain, Humboldt County, Nevada. Mapping of the internal stratigraphy of the Comus Formation yielded six new subunits and a previously unrecognized formation that is potentially correlative to the Middle Ordovician Eureka Quartzite. The age designation of the Comus Formation was reexamined, using the most current understanding of Ordovician graptolite biostratigraphy. The species of graptolites found in the Comus strata at Iron Point are Late Ordovician, in contrast to the Middle Ordovician age assignment in previous studies. Structural analyses using the new detailed mapping revealed six deformational events at Iron Point. The first fold set, F 1 , is west-vergent and likely correlative to mid-Pennsylvanian folds observed nearby at Edna Mountain. The second fold set, F 2 , records north–south contraction and is likely correlative to Early Permian folds observed at Edna Mountain. The King fault is a normal fault that strikes north and dips east. It truncates the F 1 and F 2 fold sets and has not been active since the Early Permian. The Silver Coin thrust strikes east, places the Ordovician Vinini Formation over the Comus Formation, truncates the King fault, and is not affected by the F 1 and F 2 fold sets. Timing of the Silver Coin thrust is unknown, but it is likely post-Early Permian based on crosscutting relationships. The West fault strikes southeast and dips southwest. It truncates the Silver Coin thrust on the west, and the fault surface records several phases of motion. Finally, Iron Point is bounded on the east side by the Pumpernickel fault, a normal fault that strikes north and dips east. The movement on this structure is likely related to Miocene to Recent Basin and Range faulting. Several key findings resulted from this detailed study of the Ordovician rocks at Iron Point. (1) Based on detailed mapping of the internal stratigraphy of the Comus Formation at Iron Point, it is here interpreted to be correlative with the autochthonous Late Ordovician Hanson Creek Formation rather than the well-known “Comus Formation” that hosts Carlin-style gold mineralization in the Osgood Mountains to the north. (2) The Comus Formation at Iron Point is autochthonous, and the Roberts Mountains thrust is not present at Iron Point, either at the surface or in the subsurface. (3) The stratigraphic mismatch between Iron Point and Edna Mountain requires a fault with significant lateral offset between the two areas; its current expression could be the West fault. (4) West- and southwest-vergent structures at Iron Point and Edna Mountain are rotated counterclockwise relative to northwest-vergent structures at Carlin Canyon and elsewhere in northern Nevada. This relationship is consistent with large-scale sinistral slip along the continental margin to the west.

Abstract For the last several decades, gold exploration in Nevada has been strongly focused on sedimentary rock-hosted gold deposits in the Carlin, Cortez, Independence, and Getchell trends in north-central Nevada. Accordingly, less exploration activity has been directed toward the search for similar gold deposits in the eastern Great Basin, south and east of the major trends. Deposits in the central and northern Carlin and Cortez trends are hosted primarily in Upper Devonian middle slope soft-sediment slumps and slides and base-of-slope carbonate debris flows, turbidites, and enclosing in situ fractured lime mudstones. This is in marked contrast to gold deposits in the eastern Great Basin that are hosted primarily in three chronostratigraphic horizons: (1) shallow-water, Cambrian and Ordovician carbonate platform interior, supratidal karsted horizons and shelf lagoon strata, associated with eustatic sea-level lowstands and superjacent, transgressive calcareous shale and siltstone horizons that are deposited as sea level begins to rise, (2) Early Mississippian foreland basin turbidites and debris flows overlying karsted Late Devonian platform strata, and (3) Pennsylvanian and Permian shallow marine basin strata. Stratigraphic architecture in these three horizons was influenced in part by Mesozoic (Elko and Sevier) contractional deformation, including low-angle thrust and attenuation faults, boudinage, and large-scale folds, which in turn affected the orientation and localization of synmineral brittle normal faults. A compilation of past production, reserves, and resources (including historic and inferred) suggests an overall endowment of over 41 Moz of gold (1,275 tonnes) discovered to date in the eastern Great Basin, some in relatively large deposits. Significant clusters of deposits include the Rain-Emigrant-Railroad and Bald Mountain-Alligator Ridge areas on the southern extension of the Carlin trend, the Ruby Hill-Windfall-South Lookout-Pan on the southern extension of the Cortez trend, and the Long Canyon-West Pequop-Kinsley Mountain area near Wells, Nevada. Sedimentary rock-hosted gold deposits extend to the eastern edge of the Great Basin in Utah and Idaho and include the past-producing Black Pine, Barney’s Canyon, Mercur, and Goldstrike mines. The recognition of widespread, favorable host rocks and depositional environments on the Paleozoic platform-interior shelf in the eastern Great Basin opens up vast areas that have been relatively underexplored in the past. A basic premise throughout this paper is that the better we understand the origin of rocks and the depositional and postdepositional processes under which they formed, the more accurately we can make well-founded stratigraphic, sedimentological, structural, geochemical, and diagenetic interpretations. Without this understanding, as well as the rigorous application of multiple working hypotheses to explain our observations, the advance of science and the discovery of gold deposits is problematic.

Abstract Carlin-type Au deposits in Guizhou Province, China, have similarities to and differences from the Carlin-type Au deposits in Nevada, USA. The Shuiyindong and Jinfeng deposits, located in the Guizhou Province of southern China, are compared with the Getchell and Cortez Hills Carlin-type Au deposits of Nevada in terms of ore paragenesis and pyrite chemistry. The Guizhou deposits formed in a tectonic setting similar to Nevada with the deposition of passive-margin sequences in a rifted cratonic margin context with subsequent deformation. In both districts, orebodies are preferentially hosted in limestone and calcareous siltstone and are related to faults, gold is invisible and ionically bound in arsenian pyrite, and ore-stage minerals include quartz and illite with late ore-stage minerals, including calcite, realgar, orpiment, and stibnite. Despite major similarities, however, the Guizhou deposits have characteristics that contrast with those of Carlin-type deposits of Nevada. Significant differences include the following: Guizhou ore-stage pyrite is commonly subhedral to euhedral, and typical Nevada fuzzy ore pyrite is absent. Guizhou ore pyrite contains significantly less Au, As, Hg, Tl, Cu, and Sb than the Nevada ore pyrite. Decarbonatization in Nevada deposits is expressed by extensive removal of calcite, dolomite, and Fe dolomite. In contrast, decarbonatization in the Guizhou deposits results in loss of most primary calcite, but Fe dolomite was instead sulfidized, forming ore pyrite and dolomite. This alteration is a key process in the formation of ore pyrite in the Guizhou deposits. Silicification in Nevada deposits is characterized by jasperoid replacement of calcite, dolomite, and Fe dolomite, whereas in the Guizhou deposits jasperoid replaced mainly calcite but not Fe dolomite or dolomite. Minor vein quartz, which formed during the early ore stage in Guizhou deposits, has not been identified in Nevada deposits. Clay alteration in the Nevada deposits is characterized by formation of significant illite and variable kaolinite/dickite; however, in the Guizhou deposits, trace to minor illite is present and kaolinite is uncommon. Late ore-stage arsenopyrite and vein quartz are common in Guizhou deposit but are rare in Nevada deposits. Guizhou ore fluids contained significantly more CO 2 and were higher in temperature and pressure compared with the ore fluids in Nevada deposits. To date, magmatism spatially or temporally associated with the Guizhou deposits has not been recognized. Conversely, the Nevada deposits coincide in time and space with the southward sweep of Eocene magmatism and related extension. Dolomite-stable alteration in Guizhou formed from less acidic, CO 2 -rich ore fluids at higher temperature and pressure compared with Nevada deposits, reflecting similarities between Guizhou deposits and orogenic systems. Study results are consistent with Guizhou deposits having formed in a transitional setting between typical orogenic gold and shallow Carlin-type deposits, as indicated by estimated pressure-temperature conditions at the time of gold deposition and ore-forming fluid chemistry.