Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-26T21:08:40.305Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The formation of supergene galena at Broken Hill, Northern Rhodesia (With Plate XXII.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2018

J. H. Taylor
J. H. Taylor*
Affiliation:
Dept. of Geology, University of London, King's College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Lead-zinc ore-bodies in dolomite at Broken Hill, Northern Rhodesia, consist of a sulphide core surrounded by an oxidized sheath. Oxidation has been proved to persist to a depth of at least 1150 ft. below surface. In the transitional zone between sulphide and oxidized ore galena forms a thin rim to relict masses of blende, and farther into the sulphide core it penetrates the blende along cracks and cleavages. Locally it comprises over 5 % of the ore. From its relations to smithsonite and willemite it is clearly supergene in origin and must have been deposited above the water table. This considerable migration of lead in the zone of weathering is believed to have occurred during a former period of aridity.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical magazine and journal of the Mineralogical Society , Volume 31 , Issue 242 , September 1958 , pp. 908 - 913
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1958

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brown, (J. S.), 1936. Econ. Geol., Chicago, Vol. 31, p. 331 [M.A. 6-368].Google Scholar
Garrels, (R. M.), 1954. Geochimica Acts, Vol. 5, p. 153 [M.A. 12-552].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garretty, (M. D.) and Blanchard, (R.), 1942. Proe. Australasian Inst. Min. Met., new ser. no. 127, p. 149 [M.A. 9-20].Google Scholar
Grondijs, (H. F.) and Schouten, (C.), 1937. Econ. Geol., Chicago, Vol. 32, p. 403.Google Scholar
Irving, (J. D.) and Bancroft, (H.), 1911. U.S. Geol. Surv. Bull. 478, p. 64.Google Scholar
Lindgren, (W.), 1915. Econ. Geol., Chicago, Vol. 10, p. 225.Google Scholar
Lovering, (T. S.), 1934. U.S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Paper 176, p. 28.Google Scholar
Ransome, (F. L.), 1911. Ibid., Paper 75, p. 168.Google Scholar
Robaux, (A.), 1953. Proc. Ankara Symposium on Arid Zone Hydrology, U.N.E.S.C.O., p. 17.Google Scholar
Spencer, (L. J.), 1908. Min. Mag., Vol. 15, p. 1.Google Scholar
Spencer, (L. J.), 1927. Ibid., Vol. 21, p. 388.Google Scholar
Stillwell, (F. a.), 1927. Proc. Australasian Inst. Min. Met., new ser. no. 67, p. 187.Google Scholar
Taylor, (J. H.), 1954. Colonial Geol, Min. Res., Vol. 4, p. 335 [M.A. 12-554].Google Scholar
Verwoerd, (W. J.), 1957. Ann. Univ. Stellenbosch, Vol. 33, Sect. A, p. 235.Google Scholar
Wang, (Y. T.), 1916. Trans. Amer. Inst. Min. Eng., Vol. 52, p. 657.Google Scholar