Arabian Journal of Geosciences (2021) 14:1298

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-021-07520-6

ORIGINAL PAPER

Geochemical, mineralogical and sulfur isotopic evidence

on the genesis of the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit (NW Azerbaijan)
in the Lesser Caucasus
Coşqun İsmayıl 1 & Fetullah Arık 1 & Yeşim Özen 1 & Aydın Bayramov 2

Received: 24 September 2020 / Accepted: 2 June 2021

# Saudi Society for Geosciences 2021

Abstract
The Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit, located in the western part of Azerbaijan, was extensively occurred in quartz porphyry, and
rarely in the contact of the hornfelsed andesite and quartz porphyry. The hydrothermal alterations associated with mineralization are
quartz-adularia±sericite and propylitic alterations. The Gadir deposit is mainly composed of native gold, hessite, chalcopyrite,
sphalerite, galena, pyrite, minor arsenopyrite, marcasite, digenite, barite, and adularia. The Gadir deposit is mainly composed of
Au, Ag, Cu, Pb, and Zn which maximum quantities are 10.3 ppm, 1133 ppm, 23780 ppm, 59811 ppm, and 424770 ppm,
respectively. The δ34SH2S values (−2.2 to 4.4 ‰) of sulfides (chalcopyrite, pyrite, and sphalerite) from the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-
Zn deposit indicate a magmatic origin for the ore-forming fluids. The geological, mineralogical, geochemical, and isotopic data for
Gadir deposit suggest an epithermal deposit associated with the porphyry system.

Keywords Geochemistry . Epithermal-porphyry . Sulfur isotope . Gedabek ore district (Azerbaijan) . Gadir . Lesser Caucasus

Introduction area, corresponding to the Lok-Karabakh magmatic arc area

and the Aptian to Turonian series consist of clastic sediments
The Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn ore deposit located near the and volcanogenic rocks (Nikishin et al. 2001). The Gadir Au-
Gedabek Au-Ag-Cu high sulfidation epithermal deposit Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit has been explored as a result of the
(İsmayıl et al. 2020; İsmayıl et al. 2021) is one of the main exploration activities of the Yoğundağ epithermal system in
producing mining of the Gedabek ore district which is the southern of Gedabek ore district in 2012 (GEG Report 2014;
largest porphyry-epithermal ore field of Azerbaijan. The Bayramov 2017). The Gadir deposit operated by Anglo Asian
Gedabek ore district including Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn min- Mining as underground mining since 2015 was exploited for
eralization is located in the Transcaucasus–Lesser Caucasus gold, silver, and copper.
The Gadir deposit is situated in the Lesser Caucasus, locat-
Responsible Editor: Domenico M. Doronzo ed in the central part of the Tethys metallogenic belt and
tectonic belt which from starting Pakistan, Iran, Azerbaijan,
* Coşqun İsmayıl Georgia, and extending to Turkey. The Lesser Caucasus is
cosqun.ismayil1993@gmail.com
defined throughout the central part of the Alpine-Himalayan
Fetullah Arık
orogenic belt that is region starting from the Black Sea and
farik@ktun.edu.tr extends to Georgia, Armenia and the Caspian Sea in the
Turkish-Iranian plateau (Mederer et al. 2014; Moritz et al.
Yeşim Özen
yozen@ktun.edu.tr 2016b; Rezeau et al. 2017).
The Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn ore deposit was defined as
Aydın Bayramov
low sulfidation epithermal deposit (Bayramov and
aydin.bayramov@aimc.az
Mammadov 2015; Bayramov 2017; Veliyev et al. 2018;
1
Department of Geological Engineering, Konya Technical University, Novruzov et al. 2019; Babazadeh et al. 2019; AAMP,
42250 Konya, Turkey 2019). Some researchers (Bayramov 2017; Veliyev et al.
2
Department of Geological Exploration, Azerbaijan State Oil and 2018; Novruzov et al. 2019; Babazadeh et al. 2019) have
Industry University, Baku, Azerbaijan commonly studied geology, mineralogy and soil
1298 Page 2 of 20
geochemistry of the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit.
Nevertheless, the source of the ore-forming fluids and precip-
itation mechanism of the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit
need clarification. In this study focused on the Gadir Au-Ag-
Cu-Pb-Zn deposit, detailed ore petrography, mineralogy, geo-
chemistry, and sulfur isotope analyses have been run on the
outcrop and drill core samples to investigate the origin and
formation mechanism of the deposit.
Geological settings
Regional geological setting
The Caucasus is located between the convergent Eurasian and
African-Arabian plates in the center of the Alp-Himalayas
orogenic belt. In the Late Proterozoic - Early Cenozoic period,
this region belonged to the Tethys Ocean and the Eurasian and
the African-Arab margins. Depending on the type of crust, the
Caucasus region is divided into three blocks from north to
south, known as the Greater Caucasus, the Trans Caucasus
and the Lesser Caucasus (Manafi et al. 2013). The Lesser
Caucasus formes the southernmost part of the Caucasus while
it has occurred during Jurassic-Cretaceous subduction of a
northern section of the Neotethys beneath the Eurasian margin
(e.g., Kazmin et al. 1986; Zonenshain and Pichon 1986;
Rolland et al. 2012). The Lesser Caucasus in Azerbaijan is
part of the Alpine-Himalayan Mountain that marks the colli-
sion of the African and Indian continental plates with the
Eurasian plate. The Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn mineralization
is located in the Gedabek ore district in Lesser Caucasus.
The Tethyan Metallogenic Belt extending from southeast
Europe through Anatolia to Lesser Caucasus and Iran show
the subduction and/or collision (Fig. 1; Şengör and Yılmaz
1981; Okay and Tüysüz 1999; Sosson et al. 2010; Rolland
et al. 2012; Moritz and Baker 2019). The Tethyan
Metallogenic Belt is host to several types of deposits such as
massive sulfide, porphyry Cu-(Mo) and epithermal Au de-
posits (Özen 2012; Özen and Arık 2013; Hedjazi and
Monhemius 2014; Özen and Arık 2015; Rabayrol et al.
2016; Özen and Arık 2019; Vural 2019; İsmayıl et al. 2020;
İsmayıl et al. 2021). The mineral deposits in the region are
associated with two different geodynamic evolutions which is
defined that started with magmatic arc formation because of a
Mesozoic collision throughout the Eurasian margin and contin-
ued with Cenozoic subduction-related after the Mesozoic colli-
sion (e.g., Mederer et al. 2014; Moritz et al. 2016a; Moritz et al.
2017). The Lesser Caucasus witnessed the collision events dur-
ing the closure of the Paleotethys (Late Paleozoic-Early
Mesozoic) and Neotethys oceans (Late Cretaceous-Cenozoic)
(Barrier and Vrielynck 2008; Sosson et al. 2010; Rolland,
2017). The formation of ore deposits in the Lesser Caucasus
that was the result of continental collision zone between the
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298
European and Africa-Arabian plates is classically divided into
three major tectonic settings associated with the closure of the
Tethys Ocean: 1) Lok-Karabakh belt and the Kapan zone be-
longing to Eurasian margin were formed during Jurassic-
Cretaceous subduction of a northern branch of the Neotethys
beneath Eurasia; 2) Late Cretaceous collision with the
Gondwana derived Daralagöz block; 3) the Amasia-Goycha-
Hakara (Amasia-Sevan-Akera) suture zone represented by an
ophiolite belt (Sosson et al. 2010; Hemon 2013; Veliyev et al.
2018; Calder et al. 2018). Late Jurassic-Early Cretaceous por-
phyry Cu, polymetallic massive sulfide, and epithermal de-
posits were emplaced in the Alaverdi (Allahverdi), Gedabek
and Mehmana mining districts in the Lok-Karabakh belt, and
Kapan mining district in the Kapan zone (Fig. 1; Babazadeh
et al. 1990; Kekelia et al. 2004; Mederer et al. 2014; Calder
et al. 2018), followed by Late Cretaceous polymetallic and
precious metal deposits in the Artvin-Bolnisi mining district
in the northernmost Lok-Karabakh belt (Gugushvili 2004;
Migineishvili 2005; Gugushvili et al. 2014; Popkhadze et al.
2014). Yoğundağ epithermal system is part of the Gedabek-
Bittibulağ ore-bearing belt in the Gedabek ore district, which
is one of Azerbaijan’s major metal producing belts. The Gadir
Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn mineralization belongs to the Lok-Karabakh
magmatic arc belt were formed during Jurassic-Cretaceous sub-
duction of a northern branch of the Neotethys beneath Eurasia
(Sosson et al. 2010; Hemon 2013; Veliyev et al. 2018; Calder
et al. 2018).
The Gedabek ore district, the largest porphyry-epithermal ore
field of Azerbaijan, comprises of Jurassic andesitic - dacitic
volcanics and volcanoclastics intruded by a granodiorite massif
(İsmet et al. 2003). The magmatic activity in the Gedabek region
was realized in several stages and it was stated that magmatism
occurred in Bajocian-Bathonian (Middle Jurassic) and Upper
Jurassic-Early Cretaceous (İsmayıl et al. 2018; İsmayıl et al.
2021); 1) granitoid intrusion (~162 Ma; Upper Bajocian;
İsmet et al. 2003), 2) gabbro-diorite – quartz-diorite massifs
(~138 Ma, Late Jurassic, İsmet et al. 2003; 144±1 Ma (quartz-
diorite), Late Jurassic-Early Cretaceous, Sadıkhov et al. 2018).
The Gedabek ore district including Gadir deposit and
Kapan is two porphyry-related mineralization zone of the
Jurassic-Cretaceous Lok-Karabakh magmatic arc belt
(Zürcher et al. 2019). The Gadir deposit and porphyry-
related other epithermal systems in Gedabek ore district were
emplaced in the Lok-Karabakh belt throughout the Late
Jurassic to Early Cretaceous. The Lok-Karabakh magmatic
belt included the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit, is
subdivided into five sequences: 1) Bajocian and Bathonian
volcanic, volcanoclastic and sedimentary rocks; 2) Late
Jurassic–Early Cretaceous magmatic and sedimentary rocks;
3) mid- to Late Cretaceous volcanic, volcanoclastic, and sed-
imentary rocks; 4) Paleogene sequence; and 5) Quaternary
sequence (Kazmin et al. 1986; Sosson et al. 2010; Adamia
et al. 2011; Mederer et al. 2013; Calder et al. 2018).
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298
Fig. 1 (a) Regional tectonic zones extending from Turkey through Lesser
Caucasus to Iran, (b) Tectonic zones of the Lesser Caucasus. MM:
Menderes Massif, CACC: Central Anatolian Crystalline Complex, TAP:
Tauride-Anatolid Platform, İAESZ: İzmir-Ankara-Erzincan suture zone,
PM: Pütürge Massif, BM: Bitlis Massif, NAF: North Anatolian Fault,
The Gadir ore deposit is located within the Gedabek-
Karadakh volcanic-plutonic system characterized by tectonic
movement and magmatic activity (Fig. 2). All magmatics de-
veloped along dip-slip faults in the region. The most important
and the biggest fault is the Gedabek-Bittibulağ deeper fault
(Bayramov 2015; İsmayıl et al. 2021). There are three groups
of fault zones on the basis of strike direction and morpholog-
ical characteristics: 1) faults-dislocations in north-west direc-
tion (Gedabek-Bittibulağ deeper fault, Misdağ ore-controlling
fault; the fault extending through Missu river in the vertical
direction is observed along with the hydrothermal alteration,
and various sulfide mineralizations. The width of the hydro-
thermal alteration zone observed along the Gedabek-
Bittibulağ fault is from 150–200 m up to 600–700 m); 2) faults
in north-east, submeridional direction and reverse faults
Page 3 of 20 1298
EAF: East Anatolian Fault, KB: Kapan/Kafan Block/Zone, AGHSZ:
Amasia-Goycha-Hakara (Amasia-Sevan-Akera) suture zone; yellow star:
Gedabek ore district including Gadir deposit [(a) modified from Sosson
et al. 2016, Rezeau et al. 2017; (b) modified from Mederer et al. 2019]
(Gedabek-Ertepe, Gerger-Arykhdam, Gadir ore-controlling
faults); 3) transverse faults (local fault) (Bayramov 2017).
Local geological setting
The Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit is located at the
subduction-related Jurassic-Cretaceous Lok-Karabakh suture
zone of the Lesser Caucasus, and is situated at the biggest
porphyry-epithermal system known as the Gedabek ore dis-
trict in Azerbaijan. The Late Jurassic-Early Cretaceous mag-
matic arc thickening along the Lok-Karabakh belt resulted in
the formation of typical porphyry Cu and high-sulfidation
epithermal systems (Babazadeh et al. 1990; Moritz et al.
2016b). The Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit discovered by
the Gedabek Exploration Geologist (GEG) group of
1298 Page 4 of 20
Fig. 2 (a) Geological map of the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn (modified from Veliyev et al. 2018), (b) geological map of the Gedabek Au-Ag-Cu deposit
(modified from Bayramov 2015)
Azerbaijan International Mining Company Limited (AIMC) is
embedded in Yoğundağ Mountain (2085 m) located approx-
imately 370 m northwest of the Gedabek Au-Ag-Cu open pit
deposit.
The Gadir orebody has a complicated geological structure
and hosts intrusive rocks of different ages and compositions.
Three sets of regional fault zones controlling mineralization
have been identified and are characterized on the basis of
strike direction and morphological characteristics: NW-SE
striking faults (e.g., Gedabek-Bittibulağ Deeper Fault,
Misdağ Fault), NE-trending faults (e.g., Gedabek-Ertepe fault,
Gerger-Arykhdam fault, Gadir ore-controlling faults), local
transverse faults (Babazadeh et al. 2015, 2019; Bayramov
et al. 2020).
The Gadir and Gedabek areas, known as the Gedabek ore
district, consist of lacustrine siliceous deposit, andesitic tuff,
hornfelsed andesite, andesitic porphyrite, andesite dyke,
quartz porphyry, diorite, and granodiorite. The region con-
fined to a block of Arykhdam anticline bounded from north-
east and southwest by Gedabek-Bittibulağ and Gedabek-
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298
Shekarbek faults respectively that are composed of magma-
and ore-incurrent canals of Upper Bajocian volcanism
(Bayramov 2017).
Contact-metamorphic rocks were represented by hornfels
(hornfelsed andesite). Dyke formations represented by early
quartz-diorite, microdiorite, and andesite dyke, within the ore
perspective areas bounds are developed (Bayramov 2017).
The Lower Bajocian andesite was exposed to strongly meta-
morphism (hornfelsed) as a result of the impact of Upper
Bajocian volcanism and Upper Jurassic-Lower Cretaceous in-
trusive (Bayramov 2017). Arykhdam-Shekarbek anticline and
Gödekdere-Yenikend syncline are within the bounds of NW
Flank of the Gedabek ore deposit (Guseynov et al. 2014).
The Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn mineralization is associated
with two fault types as the ore-controlling fault and the parallel
bearing fault (Bayramov 2017). The rocks along the deeper
(ore-controlling) bearing fault are brecciated, slightly schis-
tose and kaolinized. The parallel bearing fault along a North
Flank of Gadir mineralization area towards a subvolcanic
body of rhyolite-dacites and have a semi-annular character.
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298 Page 5 of 20 1298

Vertical displacement of rocks is observed along these faults.

Also, several parallel faults of NW Flank have the same situ-
ation (strike and deep angle) with the Gadir parallel fault
(Bayramov 2017). Regional faults striking NW-SE controlled
the mineralization at the Gadir deposit. The faulting occurred
in contact between the hornfelsed andesite and quartz porphy-
ry and controlled the ore deposition in the deposit. The Gadir
Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn ore deposit was extensively emplaced in
quartz porphyry, and rarely in the contact of the hornfelsed
andesite and quartz porphyry (Figs. 2, 3, 5). The quartz-
porphyry intrusive rocks host the majority of gold mineraliza-
tion at Gedabek and Gadir deposits (Novruzov et al. 2019).
The Upper Jurassic-Early Cretaceous subvolcanic rhyolitic
rocks were commonly turned into quartz porphyry and quartz-
adularia (Bayramov et al. 2020). The host rocks are highly
altered by propylitic alteration, primarily in the andesitic tuff
(Novruzov et al. 2019), andesitic porphyrite and hornfelsed
andesite. The hydrothermal eruption breccia comprises silica
sinter and lacustrine siliceous deposit, belonging to the latest
formations in the region, located in the east of Gadir mineral-
ization. The lacustrine siliceous deposit comprising the alter-
nation of silica sinter and hornfelsed andesite is cut by diorite
and andesite dykes (Figs. 2, 3, 4; Veliyev et al. 2018).
The andesitic and rhyolitic rocks in the Gadir deposit were
exposed to hydrothermal alteration because of the porphyry
intrusion (Fig. 5). The Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn mineralization
occurred extensively in quartz porphyry is mainly associated
with quartz ± sericite ± adularia and propylitic alterations
(Veliyev et al. 2018; Bayramov et al. 2020; Fig. 5). The
adularia-sericite alteration in the subvolcanic facies of the an-
desite follows N-S and NE-SW directions and represents the
deepest hydrothermal level in the Gadir area. The adularia-
sericite alteration envelops the quartz veins that are 3-10 cm
wide and can be followed up to 1 km in length (Bayramov
2017).
The hydrothermal eruption breccia pipes are about 50 m in
diameter resulted from both volcanic and erosional processes,
which are located in the central-eastern part of the Yoğundağ
Mountain around the Gadir deposit (Fig. 5). Breccia pipes
mostly consist of andesitic lava and tuffaceous rocks. The
silica sinter layer observed above Gadir uplift was varied from
5 to 10 m (average 6-7 m; GEG Report 2015; Bayramov
2017; Fig. 5). The deep angle of the silica sinter layer is ap-
proximately 25–30° and strike to S-SW, consists mainly of
opal, quartz, and jasper (Veliyev et al. 2018). Fig. 3 Stratigraphic log of drill core from the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn
deposit (modified from Veliyev et al. 2018)

Sampling and analytical methods
Geochemistry
Total 66 samples comprised drill core (n=59) and outcrop
(n=7) samples from the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit were
selected for whole-rock chemical analysis. The geochemical
analysis was carried out to determine the bulk geochemistry of
the samples in ALS Global Laboratories Ltd., Canada. All of
the samples were crushed, quartered, pulverized to 125
meshes and homogenized. Sample splits of 15 g were leached
in modified aqua regia. A larger split size was selected for
1298 Page 6 of 20 Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298

Fig. 4 Schematic field mapping of the Gadir deposit (lsd: lacustrine siliceous deposit, GHEB: Gedabek Hydrothermal Eruption Breccia)
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298
Fig. 5. 2D cross-section model of
the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn
epithermal deposit (modified
from GEG Report 2014 and GEG
Report 2015)
more representative Au analysis. Using a modified aqua regia
digestion (1:1:1 HNO3:HCl:H2O) considered a partial digest,
can provide valuable information regarding mobile and easily
soluble species, such as sulfides.
Ore petrography
Polished sections were prepared in SÜKOP Gemstone Atelier
(Konya Technical University/Selçuk University, Konya).
Identification and characterization of the mineral assemblages
for 18 samples were carried out using Leica DM2700P
microscope in Konya Technical University Geological
Engineering Department and Azerbaijan State Oil and
Industry University (Baku-Azerbaijan).
Sulfur isotopes of sulfides
The sulfur isotope analyses were performed on sphalerite
(n=4), chalcopyrite (n=4), and pyrite (n=2) for 10 samples
collected from Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit in the
Arizona University Environmental Isotope Laboratory
(Arizona-USA). The δ34S was measured on SO2 gas in a
continuous-flow gas-ratio mass spectrometer (ThermoQuest
Finnigan Delta PlusXL). Samples were combusted at 1030oC
with O2 and V2O5 using an elemental analyzer (Costech)
coupled to the mass spectrometer. It is an adaptation
(automation) of an old technique of Coleman and Moore
(1978). Standardization is based on international standards
OGS-1 and NBS123, and several other sulfide materials that
have been compared between laboratories. Calibration is linear
in the range -10 to +30 per mil. Precision is estimated to be ±
0.15 or better (1s), based on repeated internal standards.
Page 7 of 20 1298
X-ray diffraction (XRD)
The compositions of the minerals were analyzed by X-ray
diffraction (XRD) for 6 samples at the XRD laboratories of
the General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration
(MTA, Ankara). The XRD analyses were carried out using the
PANalytical X’Pert Powder diffractometer equipped with a
Ni-filtered Cu X-ray tube with a wavelength of 1.544 Å be-
tween 4 to 70° and max. 60 kV and 50 mA, a real time mul-
tiple strip PIXcel3D detector and at 2θ, 0.039 step interval and
0.25 s count analytical conditions. X-ray patterns were evalu-
ated using with Panalytical High Score Plus software and
ICSD Database.
Results
Ore petrography and XRD
Based on the mineralogical and petrographical studies of out-
crop and drill core samples collected from Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-
Pb-Zn deposit, the mineralization consists mainly of chalcopy-
rite, sphalerite, galena, arsenopyrite, digenite, marcasite, quartz,
pyrite, adularia, hessite, and native gold (Figs. 6, 7, 8, 9). XRD
analysis results reveal that AuAgTe4, tetrahedrite, cordierite,
jasper, titanomagnetite, augite, chamosite, muscovite, illite, he-
matite, epidote, chlorite, sericite, pyrite, sphalerite, chalcopyrite,
galena, magnetite, barite, quartz, calcite, and wurtzite. A couple
of diffractograms of the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit is
shown in Fig. 9.
The propylitic alteration zone is composed of chlorite, ep-
idote, illite, smectite, calcite, chamosite, sericite, and hematite.
1298 Page 8 of 20 Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298

Fig. 6 Photographs showing

macro and drill core samples from
the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu–Pb–Zn
deposit; (a-b) sphalerite (sph) and
pyrite (py) in quartz porphyry; (c)
pyrite (py) and quartz (qz); (d)
sphalerite (sph), chalcopyrite
(cpy), pyrite (py); (e) chalcopyrite
(cpy), pyrite (py) and tourmaline
(tur) (f) sphalerite (sph), chalco-
pyrite (cpy), anhydrite (anh) in
quartz porphyry; (g) chalcopyrite
(cpy), K-feldspar (Kfs) and tour-
maline (tur) in quartz porphyry;
(h) jasperoid in contact of
orebody; (i) chalcopyrite-
sphalerite in quartz porphyry; (k–
l) sphalerite (sph), chalcopyrite
(cpy), pyrite (py) and quartz (qz)
in the underground mine

Sphalerite and chalcopyrite were replaced by galena in some commonly observed replaced natural gold grains with
polished sections. Chalcopyrite is observed as inclusion in chalcopyrite (Fig. 8a, c–d, f). The gold is very fine-
sphalerite and galena (Fig. 7). The hessite (Ag 2 Te) is grained (0.5 to 30 microns) occurring as free grains in
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298 Page 9 of 20 1298

Fig. 7 Photographs showing

micro ore minerals from the Gadir
Au-Ag-Cu–Pb–Zn deposit; (a,c)
anhedral galena (gn) replaced by
sphalerite (sph); (b) anhedral
sphalerite (sph) replaced by
subhedral spongy textured pyrite
(py); (b,d,f) chalcopyrite (cpy) re-
placed by galena (gn); (e) chalco-
pyrite (cpy) replacing sphalerite
(sph), digenite (dn) inclusion in
chalcopyrite (cpy); (g) arsenopy-
rite (apy) replaced by galena (gn)
were observed; gangue mineral
(g)

quartz, pyrite, chalcopyrite and sphalerite, and also rarely
present in galena (Fig. 8a–f). In the mineralization, arse-
nopyrite was replaced by sphalerite. Jasper is also ob-
served in samples taken from contact zones by hornfelsed
andesite (Fig. 6h).
Whole-rock geochemistry
A total of 66 drill core (n=59) and outcrop (n=7) samples
collected from the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit were ana-
lyzed for their major and trace element compositions
1298 Page 10 of 20
Fig. 8 (a–f) Photographs
showing micro ore minerals from
the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu–Pb–Zn
deposit; gold (Au), hessite (hes),
chalcopyrite (cpy), pyrite (py)
(Tables 1, 2). The Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit contains
substantial quantities of Au, Ag, Cu, Pb, Zn, Sb, and As
(Tables 1, 2). Maximum contents in analyzed ore-bearing sam-
ples are 10 ppm for Au, 1133 ppm for Ag, 23780 ppm (~2.3 %)
for Cu, 59810.67 ppm (~5.9 %) for Pb, 424770 ppm (~42.4 %)
for Zn, 673 ppm Sb and 3264 ppm for As. The Gadir Au-Ag-
Cu-Pb-Zn deposit indicates that enriched intensively of Au, Ag,
Cu, Pb, Zn, Sb, and As, varied with depth and concentrated
between approximately 219 and 248 meters according to drill
core samples (Fig. 10). The higher grade Au tends to be periph-
eral to the high grade Cu and Zn at deeper zones, whereas the
higher grade Au tends to be peripheral to the high grade Ag Au,
Zn, Pb, and Sb in shallower zones (Fig. 10).
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298
Sulfur isotope of sulfides
The sulfur isotope studies were realized on outcrop sam-
ples (sphalerite, chalcopyrite, and pyrite) of Gadir Au-Ag-
Cu-Pb-Zn deposit. The pyrite (n=2), chalcopyrite (n=4),
and sphalerite (n=4) were analyzed for S isotope. The
δ 3 4 S values of sulfides range from -2.5 to 5.1 ‰
(Table 3). However, only the negative δ34S value of sul-
fides contained has one chalcopyrite value of named SM-
30 sample, while the δ34S values of sulfides for the other 9
samples range between positive 1.4 ‰ and 5.1. The δ34S
values of sphalerite in the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn were
determined to range from 2.7‰ to 3.5‰ for pyrite and
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298
Fig. 9 X-Ray Diffractograms of (a) ore sample and (b) hornfelsed andesite in Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit
1.4‰ to 5.1‰ for sphalerite. The δ34S values of the chal-
copyrite in the deposit range from -2.5 ‰ to 3.5 ‰. The
δ34S values of the fluid were calculated from the δ34S
value of sulfide minerals and the mineral–H2S equilibrium
isotopic fractionation factor given in Ohmoto and Rye
(1979) for pyrite, chalcopyrite and sphalerite assuming
H2S as the main sulfur species in the fluid (Table 3). The
δ34S for H2S in equilibrium with sulfide from Gadir depos-
it is calculated to be -2.2 to 4.4 ‰ (Fig. 11a). Therefore,
δ34SH2S values are 0 ‰ to 0.8 ‰ for pyrite; for chalcopy-
rite with -2.2 ‰ to 3.8 ‰; for sphalerite, it ranges from 0.7
‰ to 4.4 ‰. The distribution of δ 3 4 S values are
Page 11 of 20 1298
characteristics for magmatic-hydrothermal deposits (δ34S
= ±5; Jensen 1967; Gökçe 1993; Allegre 2008; Özen and
Arık 2015; Özen and Arık 2019; İsmayıl et al., 2021; Fig.
11b).
Sulfur isotope geothermometry
Sulfide-sulfide pairs were calculated to determine equilibrium
isotope temperatures in Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit
(Table 4). Calculated temperatures based on sulfide–sulfide
geothermometry were obtained from sulfur isotopic fraction-
ation of chalcopyrite–sphalerite pair obtained by combining
1298 Page 12 of 20
Fig. 10 The concentrations of Au, Ag, Cu, Zn, Pb, Sb, and As in a drill hole of the Gadir deposit
the analyzed minerals. The sphalerite-chalcopyrite pair
yielded a value of 114°C.
Discussion
The implication for magmatic activity and
mineralization
The Gadir deposit is consistent with a subduction related ba-
saltic to andesitic magmatism. The age of intrusion associated
spatially with Gedabek ore deposit located at southeast of the
Fig. 11 a. Frequency histogram plots of δ34S values for sulfide minerals
from the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit (Cpy: chalcopyrite, Sph: sphal-
erite, Py: pyrite), b. Comparison of the δ34Ssulfide values from the Gadir
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298
Gadir deposit approximately 370 m, indicates similar ages
belonging to the intrusive (Gedabek) event associated with
Bajocian-Bathonian (Middle Jurassic) volcanoclastic rocks.
The Bajocian (170 Ma) to the Neocomian (145–133 Ma)
magmatism in the Lok-Karabakh arc (Adamia et al. 1981) is
consistent with the 133–146 Ma ages of dated deposits (e.g.,
Teghout and Kavarta; Moritz et al. 2012). The geochemical
and Sr-Nd isotope data for gabbro-diorite and quartz diorite
from Gedabek intrusive (Sadıkhov et al. 2018) suggest that the
magmatic source is probably the depleted rocks of mantle
plum with subsequent contamination of the continental crust.
age of quartz diorite and gabbro-tonalite complex from
Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit with the main terrestrial reservoirs and
Gedabek (Azerbaijan) Au-Ag-Cu deposit (İsmayıl et al. 2021)
Table 1 Geochemical data of the drill core samples collected from the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit

Sample No Sample Au Ag Cu Zn Pb Al As Ba Ca Cd Co Cr Fe K Mg Mn Mo Na Ni P S Sb Sc Sr Ti V
depth (m)
Arab J Geosci

from to ppm ppm % % ppm % ppm ppm % ppm ppm ppm % % % ppm ppm % ppm ppm % ppm ppm ppm % ppm

G-1 24 26 0.01 0.20 0.00 0.00 5.00 1.82 1.00 10.0 3.72 0.25 9.00 72.0 6.98 0.10 1.52 401 0.50 0.11 10.00 320 0.01 2.00 15.0 26.0 0.11 165
G-2 77 79 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.00 1.00 2.36 6.00 20.0 2.29 0.25 21.0 64.0 7.73 0.13 1.81 622 0.50 0.10 4.00 410 0.01 2.00 8.0 55.0 0.11 87.0
G-3 125 127 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.00 5.00 1.31 1.00 10.0 1.46 0.25 6.00 67.0 3.58 0.05 1.46 282 1.00 0.17 0.50 2780 0.01 2.00 7.0 41.0 0.28 56.0
(2021) 14:1298

G-4 172 174 0.04 0.10 0.01 0.01 1.00 2.91 2.00 10.0 1.41 0.25 22.0 43.0 7.63 0.09 2.15 498 0.50 0.36 4.00 620 0.07 2.00 18.0 63.0 0.14 221
G-5 192 194 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.00 1.00 3.63 2.00 10.0 3.46 0.25 24.0 24.0 5.12 0.12 2.73 828 0.50 0.05 6.00 620 0.04 4.00 12.0 73.0 0.12 147
G-6 194 196 0.02 0.30 0.00 0.01 1.00 5.01 4.00 30.0 2.39 0.25 70.0 18.0 6.93 0.37 3.03 808 0.50 0.33 7.00 440 0.24 5.00 15.0 122 0.13 258
G-7 196 198 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.01 2.00 3.72 2.00 10.0 2.66 0.25 31.00 8.00 6.21 0.08 2.85 1020 0.50 0.06 5.00 290 0.07 4.00 12.0 83.0 0.10 183
G-8 198 200 0.01 0.20 0.00 0.01 2.00 3.21 4.00 10.0 1.6 0.25 75.0 32.0 6.44 0.09 2.52 779 0.50 0.07 4.00 340 0.23 2.00 10.0 59.0 0.12 178
G-9 206 208 0.01 0.80 0.02 0.01 3.00 4.27 3.00 60.0 2.06 0.25 18.0 47.0 5.65 0.41 2.54 610 0.50 0.18 3.00 470 0.06 4.00 10.0 100 0.13 132
G-10 211 213 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.01 13.00 4.73 3.00 110 2.41 0.25 11.0 101 2.71 0.46 2.30 508 1.00 0.22 2.00 480 0.02 2.00 9.00 112 0.15 98.0
G-11 213 215 0.01 0.10 0.02 0.00 6.00 4.43 2.00 300 2.01 0.25 8.00 95.0 3.77 0.44 1.88 461 0.50 0.25 2.00 300 0.05 4.00 10.0 114 0.08 105
G-12 215 217 0.01 0.10 0.01 0.00 9.00 3.98 2.00 210 1.99 0.25 7.00 94.0 2.97 0.34 1.87 494 0.50 0.28 3.00 320 0.03 6.00 8.00 117 0.07 64.0
G-13 217 219 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.00 8.00 4.88 9.00 280 2.77 0.25 9.00 82.0 4.07 0.27 1.67 718 1.00 0.41 9.00 640 0.05 7.00 8.00 183 0.09 151
G-14 219 221 0.16 5.10 0.02 0.02 257 3.18 58.0 930 2.13 1.80 11.0 93.0 12.1 0.24 0.54 2070 19.0 0.17 13.0 670 0.39 16.0 8.00 264 0.03 94.0
G-15 221 222 1.16 36.70 0.01 0.04 1040 1.38 293 30.0 0.78 3.20 24.0 27.0 5.71 0.15 0.23 475 47.0 0.03 27.0 350 6.06 15.0 3.00 42.0 0.01 17.0
G-16 222 223 6.80 100 0.03 0.78 4080 0.85 413 40.0 0.69 26.3 10.0 139 5.55 0.13 0.14 571 13.0 0.03 4.00 20.0 6.46 55.0 2.00 112 0.01 14.0
G-17 223 224 1.56 32.8 0.03 0.07 1030 1.30 155 90.0 0.36 4.60 14.0 110 4.27 0.31 0.23 263 12.0 0.03 4.00 10.0 4.42 22.0 3.00 47.0 0.01 13.0
G-18 224 225 10.30 39.7 0.05 0.23 1670 0.55 82.0 70.0 0.23 14.3 11.0 261 1.95 0.16 0.05 104 7.00 0.01 7.00 10.0 2.02 26.0 1.00 32.0 0.01 5.00
G-19 225 226 1.34 32.0 0.04 0.18 1520 0.50 125 60.0 0.21 11.2 7.00 256 2.19 0.20 0.05 69.0 6.00 0.01 5.00 10.0 2.36 30.0 1.00 29.0 0.01 4.00
G-20 226 227 0.79 30.3 0.05 0.58 916 0.76 107 60.0 0.06 34.2 9.00 251 2.76 0.25 0.08 47.0 5.00 0.02 3.00 20.0 3.17 41.0 1.00 13.0 0.01 6.00
G-21 227 228 1.16 33.1 0.11 0.61 585 0.87 98.0 80.0 0.15 34.5 10.0 249 2.95 0.18 0.09 69.0 1.00 0.02 6.00 60.0 3.31 58.0 1.00 14.0 0.01 7.00
G-22 228 229 1.02 17.0 0.07 0.29 432 0.75 175 50.0 0.46 15.80 15.0 123 3.31 0.31 0.10 106 3.00 0.02 6.00 150 3.80 14.0 1.00 23.0 0.01 6.00
G-23 229 230 0.89 8.00 0.02 0.13 188 0.93 139 70.0 0.49 9.10 10.0 172 3.37 0.29 0.20 194 2.00 0.02 7.00 200 3.22 9.0 2.00 20.0 0.01 9.00
G-24 230 231 0.57 1.70 0.01 0.09 166 0.87 169 60.0 0.34 5.50 6.00 202 3.80 0.31 0.19 150 2.00 0.02 5.00 240 3.78 1.0 1.00 16.0 0.01 7.00
G-25 231 232 0.21 1.50 0.00 0.04 185 0.96 63.0 200 0.92 4.90 3.00 223 3.03 0.26 0.28 301 1.00 0.02 4.00 200 2.20 1.0 2.00 23.0 0.01 12.0
G-26 232 233 0.45 7.00 0.06 0.21 64.0 0.84 827 60.0 0.24 11.1 5.00 143 3.93 0.32 0.17 99.0 2.00 0.02 2.00 180 4.09 10.0 2.00 16.0 0.01 8.00
G-27 233 234 2.58 3.30 0.03 0.21 155 1.57 202 110 2.19 9.00 36.0 103 6.56 0.32 0.41 245 24.0 0.11 1.00 160 6.57 2.00 3.00 56.0 0.01 31.0
G-28 234 235 0.09 0.60 0.01 0.02 61.0 3.67 12.0 270 2.59 0.70 49.0 74.0 3.98 0.30 1.63 531 3.00 0.14 2.00 930 1.33 5.00 4.00 118 0.04 39.0
G-29 235 236 2.26 1.50 0.11 0.59 143 0.92 78.0 40.0 0.54 23.7 34.0 90.0 6.19 0.41 0.13 76.0 14.0 0.02 11.0 370 7.43 3.00 3.00 15.0 0.01 28.0
G-30 236 237 8.07 1.80 0.14 0.72 98.0 1.21 68.0 60.0 0.6 25.2 41.0 58.0 5.96 0.49 0.21 81.0 10.0 0.05 11.0 480 7.00 1.00 4.00 25.0 0.01 39.0
G-31 237 238 6.34 3.00 0.22 0.07 186 1.58 42.0 70.0 1.46 2.70 63.0 120 8.69 0.34 0.43 179 13.0 0.12 9.00 390 10.01 3.00 6.00 47.0 0.01 102
G-32 238 239 9.05 2.90 0.37 0.05 331 3.63 34.0 60.0 2.35 2.60 55.0 107 7.14 0.31 1.34 326 14.0 0.27 8.00 400 6.96 5.00 14.0 105 0.02 180
Page 13 of 20 1298

G-33 239 240 3.09 1.20 0.13 0.04 132 5.95 34.0 120 2.88 1.60 114 90.0 6.28 0.79 1.76 429 7.00 0.40 11.0 590 4.99 4.00 21.0 193 0.08 253
Table 1 (continued)

Sample No Sample Au Ag Cu Zn Pb Al As Ba Ca Cd Co Cr Fe K Mg Mn Mo Na Ni P S Sb Sc Sr Ti V
depth (m)

from to ppm ppm % % ppm % ppm ppm % ppm ppm ppm % % % ppm ppm % ppm ppm % ppm ppm ppm % ppm
1298 Page 14 of 20

G-34 240 241 0.67 0.60 0.12 0.01 67.0 5.49 22.0 120 3.15 0.25 148 101 5.35 0.59 1.97 482 5.00 0.35 11.0 510 3.64 7.00 22.0 162 0.07 250
G-35 241 242 1.72 1.10 0.32 0.03 136 4.81 56.0 90.0 2.76 3.70 82.0 76.0 7.69 0.54 2.15 503 22.0 0.25 16.0 510 6.83 6.00 22.0 119 0.06 261
G-36 242 243 2.27 1.10 0.12 0.04 163 3.39 91.0 140 1.46 5.50 51.0 36.0 4.46 0.84 1.00 246 8.00 0.19 15.0 770 4.09 5.00 12.0 90.0 0.03 157
G-37 243 244 3.10 0.80 0.06 0.03 95.0 4.98 81.0 190 1.02 0.90 40.0 78.0 6.18 0.48 2.55 479 3.00 0.17 10.0 740 2.14 7.00 19.0 121 0.04 271
G-38 244 245 3.08 2.40 0.19 0.04 92.0 4.71 102 210 1.14 1.30 61.0 88.0 4.97 0.41 2.29 438 5.00 0.18 13.0 580 1.53 5.00 17.0 135 0.03 260
G-39 245 246 0.07 4.20 0.19 0.03 46.0 3.22 50.0 200 0.54 0.70 30.0 67.0 3.39 0.27 1.29 254 2.00 0.17 11.0 660 0.63 5.00 9.00 96.0 0.01 139
G-40 246 248 0.03 1.70 0.07 0.01 43.0 3.43 11.0 180 2.18 0.25 16.0 60.0 2.26 0.29 1.50 459 1.00 0.23 11.0 880 0.40 3.00 7.00 123 0.02 76.0
G-41 248 250 0.01 0.20 0.01 0.01 14.0 3.25 7.00 80.0 2.76 0.25 17.0 55.0 2.52 0.31 1.97 664 0.50 0.23 16.0 970 0.19 4.00 8.00 111 0.06 93.0
G-42 250 252 0.01 0.20 0.00 0.01 6.0 3.21 2.00 160 3.13 0.25 10.0 67.0 3.08 0.22 2.03 901 1.00 0.29 19.0 980 0.04 1.00 1300 157 0.10 158
G-43 252 254 0.01 0.20 0.00 0.01 3.00 1.02 3.00 60.0 3.24 0.25 4.00 30.0 2.64 0.08 0.57 1290 1.00 0.15 2.00 940 0.02 1.00 3.00 136 0.03 23.0
G-44 254 256 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.01 2.00 1.38 4.00 50.0 3.14 0.25 6.00 25.0 3.01 0.08 0.37 875 1.00 0.16 2.00 940 0.02 1.00 3.00 131 0.03 24.0
G-45 256 258 0.01 0.10 0.01 0.01 22.0 3.74 10.0 100 3.02 0.25 11.0 43.0 4.17 0.39 1.45 767 1.00 0.3 17.0 540 0.07 1.00 18.0 139 0.07 214
G-46 258 260 0.02 0.10 0.01 0.02 38.0 5.72 6.00 100 2.83 0.25 13.0 63.0 7.64 0.83 2.38 695 0.50 0.35 22.0 370 0.12 1.00 31.0 129 0.15 429
G-47 260 262 0.02 0.10 0.00 0.01 29.0 5.63 7.00 80.0 3.06 0.25 13.0 38.0 6.82 0.62 2.91 767 0.50 0.23 23.0 290 0.04 1.00 26.0 110 0.20 355
G-48 262 264 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.01 27.0 5.3 8.00 50.0 3.29 0.25 12.0 219 8.20 0.46 1.09 532 0.50 0.34 14.0 300 0.12 2.00 21.0 160 0.17 270
G-49 264 266 0.01 0.10 0.01 0.01 27.0 5.67 12.0 70.0 2.96 0.25 32.0 266 10.35 0.57 1.18 530 0.50 0.33 11.0 200 0.79 1.00 26.0 151 0.16 148
G-50 266 268 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.01 18.0 6.32 11.0 60.0 3.28 0.25 18.0 251 10.40 0.77 1.06 538 0.50 0.37 12.0 210 0.19 1.00 30.0 190 0.17 172
G-51 268 270 0.02 0.10 0.00 0.00 13.0 3.34 1.00 30.0 4.70 0.25 9.00 82.0 2.79 0.31 1.73 425 0.50 0.17 16.0 100 0.11 1.00 19.0 83.0 0.06 141
G-52 270 272 0.01 0.10 0.01 0.01 25.0 5.28 8.00 60.0 3.34 0.25 27.0 225 6.21 0.46 1.31 460 0.50 0.32 16.0 110 0.22 1.00 24.0 147 0.12 214
G-53 272 274 0.02 0.10 0.01 0.01 30.0 5.13 4.00 80.0 2.77 0.25 56.0 188 6.68 0.47 1.65 492 0.50 0.24 21.0 230 0.42 1.00 20.0 126 0.13 285
G-54 274 276 0.04 7.90 0.04 0.01 23.0 6.56 7.00 440 2.52 0.25 44.0 186 6.94 1.22 2.22 606 0.50 0.24 22.0 190 0.38 1.00 25.0 210 0.16 314
G-55 276 278 0.03 1.90 0.01 0.01 14.0 6.42 10.0 460 2.21 0.25 25.0 137 5.31 1.40 1.87 492 0.50 0.33 12.0 120 0.19 1.00 30.0 183 0.18 381
G-56 278 280 0.03 0.60 0.00 0.01 16.0 7.59 9.00 160 4.01 0.25 39.0 197 5.63 0.97 1.48 535 0.50 0.5 12.0 210 0.35 1.00 35.0 243 0.21 533
G-57 280 282 0.01 0.20 0.00 0.00 11.0 4.29 14.0 250 1.46 0.25 20.0 256 9.03 0.85 1.00 431 0.50 0.22 11.0 110 0.32 1.00 18.0 96.0 0.14 257
G-58 282 284 0.02 1.10 0.00 0.00 8.00 4.29 18.0 410 1.11 0.25 17.0 220 5.89 1.22 1.24 473 0.50 0.19 9.00 190 0.41 1.00 15.0 108 0.13 347
Arab J Geosci

G-59 284 286 0.09 1.30 0.00 0.01 13.0 4.09 10.0 130 1.63 0.25 41.0 198 3.65 0.71 1.18 444 1.00 0.30 8.00 70.0 0.93 1.00 18.0 156 0.11 297
(2021) 14:1298
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298 Page 15 of 20 1298

Table 2 Geochemical data of the

outcrop samples collected from Sample QR-01 QR-02 QR-03 QR-04 QR-05 QR-06 QR-07
the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn
deposit Au (ppm) 0.03 1.24 3.02 4.50 0.45 3.40 0.05
Ag (ppm) 0.38 60.64 0.38 1133.24 15.15 265.54 13.53
Cu (%) 0.14 0.03 0.90 2.38 0.11 1.04 0.02
Al (%) 2.34 0.83 0.45 0.66 2.16 1.15 5.12
As (ppm) 17.86 102.29 72.82 3264.38 126.66 756.69 10.00
B (ppm) 5.00 5.00 5.00 10.00 5.00 10.00 5.00
Ba (%) 0.05 0.23 0.02 4.08 0.03 9.26 0.11
Be (ppm) 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Ca (%) 9.22 14.53 17.00 2.25 19.54 0.83 1.08
Cd (ppm) 1.00 19.68 1.00 836.14 387.10 739.04 1.00
Co (ppm) 88.00 1167.2 337.14 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
Cr (ppm) 10.00 10.00 10.00 182.63 80.82 207.78 10.00
Fe (%) 28.08 29.22 2.55 20.07 8.48 27.75 16.15
Ga (ppm) 10.00 5.00 5.00 50.00 10.00 30.00 10.00
Hg (ppm) 1.00 39.58 1.00 204.12 184.36 250.63 1.00
K (%) 0.18 0.30 0.24 0.12 0.48 0.18 1.84
Mg (%) 0.92 0.19 0.03 0.10 0.62 0.17 3.03
Mn (ppm) 1117.08 1438.4 690.94 12124.4 1897.6 19310.5 1862.6
Mo (ppm) 12.87 270.05 88.84 58.74 40.71 81.82 10.00
Na (%) 0.21 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.11
Ni (ppm) 88.29 111.54 49.55 436.15 20.00 1257.37 115.73
P (ppm) 340.00 130.00 10.00 10.00 310.00 90.00 310.00
Pb (ppm) 5.00 876.74 25.18 59810.7 753.36 14283.6 129.69
S (%) 0.19 18.40 2.89 11.50 5.40 9.65 4.91
Sb (ppm) 5.00 39.98 5.00 672.68 5.00 139.03 45.18
Sc (ppm) 8.00 6.00 1.00 0.50 9.00 1.00 40.00
Sr (ppm) 193.54 140.50 29.71 1363.45 75.08 5267.31 53.60
Th (ppm) 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00
Ti (%) 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.46
V (ppm) 317.80 15.00 4.00 21.00 109.00 21.00 434.52
W (ppm) 5.00 30.00 69.00 5.00 10.00 5.00 5.00
Zn (%) 0.01 0.12 0.03 42.48 29.04 29.92 0.05
Cs (ppm) 47.38 74.87 27.07 188.56 15.00 15.00 92.65
Te (ppm) 48.20 123.76 25.24 297.94 15.00 15.00 117.78
Sn (ppm) 5.00 21.93 5.00 77.72 5.00 5.00 19.12
Zr (ppm) 85.67 5.00 13.50 5.00 5.00 5.00 24.57
Rb (ppm) 1.00 9.95 6.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 106.95
Se (ppm) 5.00 5.00 14.15 95.31 66.85 60.45 5.00
K (%) 0.34 0.41 0.20 0.152 0.16 0.05 3.61
Pd (ppm) 5.00 10.00 5.00 60.37 5.00 5.00 5.00

Gedabek intrusive was determined as 144 ± 1 Ma (U-Pb
zircon age; Early Cretaceous; Sadıkhov et al. 2018), 145–
157 Ma (Late Jurassic-Early Cretaceous; Sadıkhov and
Shatova 2017), respectively. According to Sadıkhov
et al. (2018), Gedabek intrusive is one of the first mag-
matic activities in the Gedabek ore district. The quartz
porphyry intrusion associated with the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-
Pb-Zn deposit suggests that it is the product of extensive
silicification. According to Hemon et al. (2012), silicifica-
tion processes suggest that a strong lithological control
(more permeable horizons) as well as the propylitic alter-
ation, within bedded pyroclastic rocks.
1298 Page 16 of 20 Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298

Table 3 Sulfur isotope data for chalcopyrite, pyrite, sphalerite and H2S Vertical zoning in clay minerals from shallow, low tempera-
of the Gedabek Au-Ag-Cu deposit (for sphalerite-H2S = 1000lnα =
ture kaolinite-smectite assemblages to deeper, higher-
0.10(106/T2); pyrite-H2S=1000lnα = 0.40(106/T2); chalcopyrite-H2S =
1000lnα = -0.05(106/T2) from Ohmoto and Rye (1979)); temp.= 114oC temperature illite have also been described (Simmons et al.
2005). Silica sinter observed above Gadir uplift is one of the
Mineral Sample No δ34S (‰) δ34S (‰) primary criteria indicated that Gadir horst belongs to low
Mineral H2S
sulfidation epithermal deposit (Bayramov 2017; Veliyev
Chalcopyrite SM-27 2.8 3.1 et al. 2018).
SM-30 -2.5 -2.2 The quartz-sulfide Au-Cu mineralization is characterized
QR-03 3.5 3.8 by quartz and pyrite, although lower temperature marcasite,
QR-06 2.1 2.4 and higher temperate pyrrhotite and chalcopyrite are also rec-
Pyrite QR-02 3.5 0.8 ognized (e.g., Nolans, Adelong, Mineral Hill, Round
QR-03 2.7 0 Mountain, Emperor). The fine pyrite is commonly arsenian
Sphalerite SM-27 4.1 3.4 and locally displays difficult metallurgy, while coarser sul-
QR-04 5.1 4.4 fides are typically associated with near surficial supergene
QR-05 1.4 0.7 Au enrichment (Corbett and Leach 1998; Corbett 2002,
QR-06 3.1 2.4 2004, 2005). The gold mineralization commonly occurred in
the form of- or in association with quartz veins and stockwork.
The sulfides in Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn veins can be coarse-
grained and massive, can form as band and dissemination in
quartz and calcite. The Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit in-
Source of the ore-forming fluids and precipitation cludes pyrite, sphalerite, galena, chalcopyrite, marcasite,
mechanism digenite, hessite, minor arsenopyrite, AuAgTe4, tetrahedrite,
cordierite, jasper, titanomagnetite, augite, chamosite, musco-
The Gadir deposit is mainly represented by the quartz±adular- vite, hematite, epidote, chlorite, sericite, magnetite, illite, bar-
ia±pyrite alteration, and the local chalcopyrite-pyrite- ite, and wurtzite. Jasper which is specific to porphyry-
sphalerite-galena dominated mineralization. The epithermal epithermal deposits in the intensive silicification zone
Au-Ag deposits occur primarily by pyrite, sphalerite, galena, (Corbett, 2005) was also observed in samples taken from con-
chalcopyrite typically within quartz veins with local carbon- tact zones by hornfelsed andesite. The geochemical analysis
ate, and associated near-neutral wall rock alteration (illite results of the Gadir deposit indicate that enriched intensively
clays), deposited from dilute hydrothermal fluids (Corbett of Au, Ag, Cu, Pb, Zn, Sb, and As, varied with depth and
and Leach 1998). The quartz-adularia-pyrite assemblage was concentrated between approximately 219 and 248 meters ac-
formed in a reduced and neutral environment typical of low- cording to drill core samples. Boiling and mixing leading to
intermediate sulfidation systems (Veliyev et al. 2018). The the deposition of ore and gangue minerals in an epithermal
environment of the hydrothermal system at Gadir deposit system for an ascending Au–Ag-bearing hydrothermal fluid is
can be considered to be neutral. It can be noticed that the proposed to explain the vertical changes in physico-chemical
environment of the Gedabek ore district is commonly favor- parameters, and thus the zonation and vertical extent of the
able for gold to stay in solution as Au (HS)-complex. resulting mineralization (e.g., André-Mayer et al. 2002;
Alteration mineralogy in low sulfidation epithermal systems Yılmaz et al. 2013). The presence of adularia and calcite,
shows lateral zoning from proximal quartz-chalcedony- commonly pseudomorphosed by quartz is a strong indicator
adularia in mineralized veins through illite-pyrite to distal for boiling (e.g., Browne and Ellis 1970; Keith and Muffler
propylitic alteration assemblages (e.g., Veliyev et al. 2018; 1978; Browne 1978; Drummond and Ohmoto 1985; Reed and
Prihatmokoa and Idrus 2020). The hornfelsed andesite and Spycher 1985; Hedenquist and Henley 1985; Henley and
jasper (chalcedony) specific to low sulfidation epithermal de- Hedenquist 1986; Simmons and Christenson 1994;
posits are observed in mineralization (Veliyev et al. 2018). Simmons and Browne 2000). The release of CO2 to the vapor

Table 4 Sulfur isotope geothermometric temperature (°C) and δ34S values of the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit

Sample/Mineral δ34S (‰) values of chalcopyrite δ34S (‰) values of sphalerite δ34S (‰) values of pyrite Sulfur isotope
geothermometric
temperature (°C)*

QR-06 2.1 3.1 - 114

*
Calculated using the related equation suggested by Ohmoto and Rye (1979)
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298
phase during boiling leads to a pH increase in the solution,
causing a shift from the illite stability domain to that of adu-
laria, and the precipitation of calcite and adularia (André-
Mayer et al. 2002). The presence of hydrothermal breccias
in the Au-Ag deposit is evidence for periods of sharp pressure
drops (Kızıltepe (Turkey) Au-Ag deposit; Yılmaz et al. 2013).
This current study provides sulfur isotope thermometrical
data of ~114 °C. GEG Report (2015) proposes two main pro-
cesses for gold deposition at Gadir: (1) slow cooling of the
bulk hydrothermal reservoir leading to a low grade and large
tonnage gold deposition together with quartz and adularia; and
(2) local mixing with meteoric water leading to high gold
deposition. The sericitic alteration is present with extensive
development in the quartz-diorite body and especially in the
lava flows of the andesites, associated with the Pb-Zn miner-
alization. The upper parts of the volcanic structure are domi-
nated by the argillic alteration together with the silicification
specific to the Pb-Zn-Cu-Au-Ag mineralization (Veliyev et al.
2018).
The δ34S values of chalcopyrite, sphalerite and pyrite range
from -2.5 to 3.5 ‰, 1.4 to 5.1‰, 2.7 to 3.5‰, respectively.
The δ34SH2S values are 2.5 to 5.9 ‰ for chalcopyrite, 3.4 to
5.9 ‰ for sphalerite, 2.0 to 3.0 ‰ for pyrite. The distribution
of δ34S values (±5) and the proximity to zero per thousand are
features of the magmatic-hydrothermal deposits (Jensen 1967;
Gökçe 1993; Özen and Arık 2015; Özen and Arık 2019;
İsmayıl et al., 2021). The δ34S values of H2S can represent
the δ34S values of the hydrothermal fluid (e.g., Ohmoto and
Rye 1979). Therefore, calculated δ34S values for H2S,
representing the composition of the fluids responsible for the
sulfide mineral formations are between -2.2 and 4.4 ‰, it is
consistent with the sulfur in sulfide minerals is derived from
the same magmatic source.
Many observations such as (1) the magmatic fluid evolu-
tion, (2) the quartz ± adularia ± pyrite alteration and propylitic
alteration, (3) the low sulfur isotope geothermometry, and (4)
silica sinter and siliceous deposit, support the epithermal de-
posit associated with the porphyry for the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-
Pb-Zn in the Gedabek ore district.
Conclusions
1) The Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit (western
Azerbaijan) located in the Lesser Caucasus, which is a
segment of the Tethyan Metallogenic Belt, was exten-
sively occurred in quartz porphyry, and rarely in the con-
tact of the hornfelsed andesite and quartz porphyry. The
Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit is associated with
propylitic alteration, quartz±adularia veins, and
silicification.
2) The Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit is intensively com-
posed of Au, Ag, Cu, Zn, Pb, Mn, Sb, Hg, As, and S, and
Page 17 of 20 1298
it was mineralized with native gold, hessite, chalcopyrite,
sphalerite, galena, arsenopyrite, digenite, quartz, and
pyrite.
3) The calculated δ34S values for H2S consistent with the
sulfur in the chalcopyrite, sphalerite, and pyrite suggested
that the chalcopyrite and sphalerite associated with gold
and silver were derived from the same magmatic source,
and are cogenetic.
4) Sulfur isotopic geothermometer data indicates that the
Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn deposit occurred at low-temper-
ature corresponding to epithermal deposit. However, fluid
inclusion study should be realized to constrain the tem-
perature during mineralization at the Gadir deposit.
5) Consequently, the ore and alteration mineral assemblages
and sulfur isotope data indicate that the Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-
Pb-Zn mineralization formed by the development of the
magmatic activity closely associated with the tectonic
evolution of the region was dominantly derived from the
same magmatic origin. The mineral assemblage, silica
sinter, quartz veins, breccia pipes in the Gadir Au-Ag-
Cu-Pb-Zn deposit suggest that an epithermal ore deposit
associated with a porphyry system.
6) It will be appropriate to carry out fluid inclusion analysis,
which cannot be done in this study, in further studies and
to define the formation temperature of the Gadir Au-Ag-
Cu-Pb-Zn deposit. This will also reveal the relationship
between Gadir Au-Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn mineralization and
Gedabek Au-Ag-Cu mineralization.
Acknowledgements This study was financially supported by the
Scientific Research Project Coordination of Konya Technical
University (Selçuk University Project No: 18201084). The authors thank
to Azerbaijan International Mining Company (Anglo Asian Mining PLC,
United Kingdom ) for their support. The authors would like to thank the
two reviewers and editors of the journal for their comments and advice to
improve the quality of this paper.
Declarations
Conflict of interest The author(s) declare that they have no competing
interests.
References
Adamia SA, Chkhotua T, Kekelia M, Lordkipanidze MB, Shavishvili I,
Zakariadze G (1981) Tectonics of the Caucasus and adjoining
regions—implications for the evolution of the Tethys Ocean. J
Struct Geol 3:437–447
Adamia S, Zakariadze G, Chkhotua T, Sadradze N, Tsereteli N,
Chabukiani A, Gventsdze A (2011) Geology of the Caucasus: a
review. Turk J Earth Sci 20:489–544
Allegre CJ (2008) Isotope Geology. Cambridge University Press, p 512
André-Mayer AS, Leroy J, Bailly L, Chauvet A, Marcoux E, Grancea L,
Llosa F, Rosas J (2002) Boiling and vertical mineralization zoning.
1298 Page 18 of 20
A case study from the Apacheta low-sulfidation epithermal gold-
silver deposit, south Peru. Mineralium Deposita 37(5):452–464.
Anglo Asian Mining PLC (2019) Mineral Resources Gadir Underground
Mine. Anglo Asian Mining PLC Report, London, pp 11–17
Babazadeh VM, Makhmudov AI, Ramazanov VG (1990) Porphyry cop-
per and molybdenum deposits: Baku. Azerbaijan Publication, 377 p
Babazadeh V, Veliyev A, Abdullayeva ShF, Imamverdiyev N,
Mammedov S, Ibrahimov J, Bayramov A, 2015. New perspective
Gadir mineralization field in Gеdabek ore region. The Reports of
National Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan, LXXI, 2, Baku, 8 p.
Babazadeh V, Mursalov S, Veliyev A, Imamverdiyev N, Abdullayeva S,
Bayramov A, Talibov M (2019) Geochemical anomalies in the NW
flank of Gedabek mine (Lesser Caucasus, Azerbaijan). Int J Mining
Sci (IJMS) 5(1):31–42
Barrier E, Vrielynck B (2008) Paleotectonic Maps of the Middle East.
Middle East Basins Evolution Programme, CGMW, Atlas, Maps,
pp 1–14
Bayramov AA (2015) Petrology and potential mineralization of Gedabek
intrusion. Baku State University, Master Thesis, 75 p
Bayramov A (2017) Geological setting of the new discovering Gadir low
sulfidation epithermal deposit, Gedabek Ore District, Lesser
Caucasus, Azerbaijan. IJISET - InT J Innovative Sci Eng TechnoL
4:12
Bayramov A, Mammadov S (2015) Gedabek and Gadir Epithermal
Deposits, Lesser Caucasus, Azerbaijan, VI. International
Conference of Young Scientists and Students, Multidisciplinary
Approach to Solving Problems of Geology and Geophysics, Baku,
Azerbaijan 12-15 October, pp 90–91
Bayramov A, Mammadov S, Veliyev A, Arık F and İsmayıl C (2020)
Geological setting and ore reserves of Gadir mineralization
(Gedabek District) deposit, Azerbaijan, Lesser Caucasus,
International Science and Academic Congress, 102-106.
Browne PRL (1978) Hydrothermal alteration in active geothermal fields.
Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci 6:229–250
Browne, P. R. L. and Ellis, A. J. 1970. The Ohaki-Broadlands hydrother-
mal area, New Zealand; mineralogy and related geochemistry. Am J
Sci, 1970, 269.2: 97-131.
Calder MF, Moritz R, Ulyanov A, Chiaradia M, Spangenberg, JE,
Melkonyan RL, 2018. Jurassic ore-forming systems during the
Tethyan orogeny: constraints from the Shamlugh deposit, Alaverdi
district, Armenia, Lesser Caucasus, Mineralium Deposita, 1-22.
Corbett GJ (2002) Structural controls to porphyry Cu-Au and epithermal
Au-Ag deposits in applied structural geology for mineral explora-
tion. Australian Ins Geosci Bulletin 36:32–35
Corbett GJ, 2004, Epithermal and porphyry gold – geological models in
Pacrim Congress 2004, Adelaide, The Australasian Institute of
Mining and Metallurgy, p. 15-23.
Corbett GJ, 2005, Epithermal Au-Ag deposit types – implications for
exploration: Proexplo Conference Peru May 2005, published on
CD.
Corbett, G.J., and Leach, T.M., 1998. Southwest Pacific gold-copper
systems: structure, alteration and mineralization, Special
Publication 6, Society Econ Geol, 238.
Drummond SE, Ohmoto H (1985) Chemical evolution and mineral de-
position in boiling hydrothermal systems. Econ Geol 80(1):126–147
GEG (AIMC Gedabek Exploration Group; Gadimov, S. Veliyev, A.,
Cafarov, Z., Bayramov, A., İbrahimov, J., Mammadov, S.) Report,
2015. Exploration and planning of the Gadir low sulfidation
epithermal deposit project, Gedabek, Azerbaijan.
GEG (AIMC Gedabek Exploration Group; Gadimov, Sh. Veliyev, A.,
Cafarov, Z., Bayramov, A., İbrahimov, J., Mammadov, S.) Report,
2014. The results and future planning of the perspective areas (Au,
Ag, Cu, Mo, Zn) of Gedabek Ore District, Gedabek, Azerbaijan.
Gökçe A (1993) In the research condition of the origin and formation of
hydrothermal ore deposits investigation stable isotope geochemistry
and examples from Turkey. Geological Engineering J 42:89–101
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298
Gugushvili V (2004) Two types of gold mineralization in the Bolnisi
mining district related to Cretaceous volcanism. Proceedings Geol
Institute Georgian Academy Sci New Series 119:749–755
Gugushvili V, Bukia AS, Goderdzishvili NN, Javakhidze DG, Zakaraia
DP, Muladze, IU, Shavishvili ID, Shubitidze JS, Tchokhonelidze
MJ, 2014. Bolnisi ore district: geological development and structure,
genesis of mineralization, economic potential and perspectives ac-
cording to data for April 2014: Tbilisi, Caucasus Mining Group, 55
p. (in Russian with English abstract).
Guseynov G, Valiyev A, Mammadov S, Bayramov A, 2014.
Mineralization of the Gedabek gold-copper deposit, (Lesser
Caucasus), 8th International Symposium on Eastern Mediterranean
Geology. Muğla, Turkey, October 13-17, p. 116.
Hedenquist JW, Henley RW (1985) The importance of CO 2 on freezing
point measurements of fluid inclusions; evidence from active geo-
thermal systems and implications for epithermal ore deposition.
Econ Geol 80(5):1379–1406
Hedjazi F, Monhemius J (2014) Copper-gold ore processing with ion
exchange and SART Technology at Anglo Asian’s Gedabek Mine
in Azerbaijan. Miner Eng 64:120–125
Hemon P, 2013. The Gedabek quartz-adularia-pyrite altered, Cu-Au-Ag
epithermal deposit, Western Azerbaijan, Lesser-Caucasus: Geology,
alteration, mineralization, fluid evolution and genetic model, MSc
thesis, University of Geneva, Switzerland, 37 p.
Hemon P., Moritz R, Ramazanov V, 2012. The Gedabek Ore Deposit:
mineralization, alteration and fluid evolution of a Lower Cretaceous
Epithermal System within the Lesser Caucasus of Western
Azerbaijan, Abstracts of the International Workshop “Gold and
Base Metal Deposits of the Mediterranean and the South Caucasus
– Challenges and Opportunities”, Tbilisi, poster, 15 p.
Henley RW, Hedenquist JW (1986) Introduction to the geochemistry of
active and fossil geothermal system. Monograph Series Mineral
Deposits 26:1–22
İsmayıl C, Arık F, Özen Y (2018) Preliminary Geological and min-
eralogical features of Gedabek (western Azerbaijan) Au-Cu de-
posit, Ömer Halisdemir University Journal of Engineering
Sciences. Cappadocia Earth Sci Sypmposium Special Issue
7(3):1153–1158
İsmayıl C, Arık F, Özen Y (2020) Mineralogical and ore petrographic
comparison of Gedabey and Gadir deposits in Gedabey region
(Western Azerbaijan). Azerbaijan Nat Academic Sci ANAS
Transac Earth Sci N2:49–60
İsmayıl C, Özen Y, Arık F, Veliyev A (2021) Genesis of the Gedabek Au-
Ag-Cu deposit (Azerbaijan) in the Lesser Caucasus: Insights from
geochemistry, fluid inclusion and sulfur isotope. J Asian Earth Sci
206:104627, 20p
İsmet AR, Hassanov RK, Abdullaev IA, Bagirbekova OD, Jafarova RS,
Jafarov SA (2003) Radiochronological study of geological forma-
tions of Azerbaijan: Baku. Nafta Press, Azerbaijan, p 191 (in
Russian)
Jensen ML (1967) Sulphur isotopes and mineral genesis. In: Barnes HL
(ed) Geochemistry of Hydrothermal Ore Deposits. Holt, Rinehart
and Winston, Inc., p 670
Kazmin VG, Sbortshikov IM, Ricou LE, Zonenshain LP, Boulin J,
Knipper AL (1986) Volcanic belts as markers of the Mesozoic-
Cenozoic active margin of Eurasia. Tectonophysics 123(1-4):123–
152
Keith TEC, Muffler LJP (1978) Minerals produced during cooling and
hydrothermal alteration of ash flow tuff from Yellowstone drill hole
Y-5. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 3(3-4):373–402
Kekelia S, Kekelia M, Otkhmezuri Z, Özgür N, Moon C (2004) Ore-
forming systems in volcanogenic-sedimentary sequences by the ex-
ample of base metal deposits of the Caucasus and East Pontic
Metallotect. J Mineral Res Exploration 129(129):1–16
Manafi M, Arian M, Hashem STR, Solgi A (2013) Tethys Subduction
History in Caucasus Region. Open J Geol 3:222–232
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298
Mederer J, Moritz R, Ulianov A, Chiaradia M (2013) Middle Jurassic to
Cenozoic evolution of arc magmatism during Neotethys subduction
and arc-continent collision in the Kapan Zone, southern Armenia.
Lithos 177:61–78
Mederer J, Moritz R, Zohrabyan S, Vardanyan A, Melkonyan R, Ulianov
A (2014) Base and precious metal mineralization in Middle Jurassic
rocks of the Lesser Caucasus: a review of geology and metallogeny
and new data from the Kapan. Alaverdi and Mehmana districts Ore
Geol Rev 58:185–207
Mederer J, Moritz R, Chiaradia M, Spikings R, Spangenberg JE,
Selby D (2019) Ore formation during Jurassic subduction of
the Tethys along the Eurasian Margin: Constraints from the
Kapan District, Lesser Caucasus, Southern Armenia. Econ
Geol 114(7):1251–1284
Migineishvili R (2005) Hybrid nature of the Madneuli Cu-Au deposit.
Georgia Geochem, Mineral Petrol J Bulgarian Academy Sci 43:
128–132
Moritz R, Baker T (2019) Metallogeny of the Tethyan Orogenic Belt:
From Mesozoic Magmatic Arcs to Cenozoic Back-Arc and
Postcollisional Settings in Southeast Europe, Anatolia, and the
Lesser Caucasus: An Introduction, Society of Economic
Geologists. Econ Geol 114(7):1227–1235
Moritz R, Selby D, Ovtcharova M, Mederer J, Melkonyan R,
Hovakimyan S, Tayan R, Popkhadze N, Gugushvili V, and
Ramazanov V, 2012. Diversity of geodynamic settings during Cu,
Au and Mo ore formation in the Lesser Caucasus: New age con-
straints, in European Mineralogical Conference, Frankfurt,
Germany, Proceedings: European Mineralogical Conference, 1, ab-
stract EMC2012-745.
Moritz R, Rezeau H, Ovtcharova M, Tayan R, Melkonyan R,
Hovakimyan S, Ramazanov V, Selby D, Ulianov A, Chiaradia M,
Putlitz B (2016a) Long-lived, stationary magmatism and pulsed
porphyry systems during Tethyan subduction to post-collision evo-
lution in the southernmost Lesser Caucasus. Armenia and
Nakhitchevan Gondwana Res 37:465–503
Moritz, R., Melkonyan, R., Selby, D., Popkhadze, N., Gugushvili, V.,
Tayan, R., Ramazanov, V., 2016b, Metallogeny of the Lesser
Caucasus: from arc construction to post-collision evolution,
Society of Economic Geologists, Inc., Special Publication 19,
Chapter 6, 157–192.
Moritz R, Rezeau H, Mederer J, Gialli S, Hemon P, Lavoie J, Calder M,
Hovakimyan S, Melkonyan R, Tayan R, Popkhadze N, Gugushvili
V, Ramazanov V, 2017. Gold deposits of the Lesser Caucasus:
products of successive Mesozoic and Cenozoic geodynamic set-
tings. In: Proceedings of the 14th SGA Biennial Meeting.
Nikishin AM, Ziegler PA, Panov DI, Nazarevich BP, Brunet MF (2001)
Mesozoic and Cainozoic evolution of the Scythian platform-Black
Sea-Caucasus domain. Mémoires du Muséum national d'histoire
naturelle (1993) 186:295–346
Novruzov N, Veliyev A, Bayramov A, Mammadov S, Ibrahimov J,
Ebdulrehimli A (2019) Mineral composition and paragenesis of al-
tered and mineralized zones in the Gadir low sulfidation epithermal
deposit (Lesser Caucasus, Azerbaijan). Iranian J Earth Sci 11(1):14–
29
Ohmoto H, Rye O (1979) Isotopes of sulfur and carbon. In: Barnes HL
(ed) Geochemistry of hydrothermal ore deposits. Wiley, New York,
pp 506–567
Okay AI, Tüysüz O (1999) Tethyan sutures of northern Turkey:
Geological Society of London. Special Pub 156:475–515
Özen, Y., 2012. Genetic Modelling of the Polymetalic Mineralizations
between Ahmetli (Simav-Kütahya) – Pınarbaşı (Gediz-Kütahya).
PhD thesis, Selçuk University, Turkey, 302 p.
Özen Y, Arık F (2013) Fluid inclusion and sulfur isotope thermometry of
the İnkaya (Simav-Kütahya) Cu-Pb-Zn-(Ag) Mineralization, NW
TURKEY, Cent. Eur J Geosci 5(3):435–449
Page 19 of 20 1298
Özen, Y. and Arık, F., 2015. S, O and Pb isotopic evidence on the origin
of the İnkaya (Simav-Kütahya) Cu–Pb–Zn–(Ag) Prospect, NW
Turkey, Ore Geology Reviews, 70, 262–280.
Özen Y, Arık F (2019) Geochemical, stable isotopic (S, O, H, C),
microthermometric and geochronological (U-Pb) evidence on the
genesis of the Pınarbaşı porphyry Cu-Mo mineralization (Gediz-
Kütahya, Western Turkey). J Geochem Explor 204:142–166
Popkhadze N, Moritz R, Gugushvili V (2014) Architecture of Upper
Cretaceous rhyodacitic hyaloclastite at the polymetallic Madneuli
deposit, Lesser Caucasus, Georgia. Central European J Geosci
6(3):308–329
Prihatmokoa S, Idrus A (2020) Low-sulfidation epithermal gold deposits
in Java, Indonesia: Characteristics and linkage to the volcano-
tectonic setting Sukmandaru Prihatmokoa. Arifudin Idrus, Ore
Geol Rev 121:103490
Rabayrol F, Mišković A, Hart CJR, 2016. Porphyry and epithermal
metallogeny of the Anatolian-Tauride Belt, Turkey, Society of
Economic Geologists, SEG-MJD 2016 Conference.
Reed MH, Spycher NF (1985) Geology and Geochemistry of Epithermal
Systems. Rev Econ Geol 2:249–272
Rezeau H, Moritz R, Leuthold J, Hovakimyan S, Tayan R, Chiaradia M
(2017) 30 Myr of Cenozoic magmatism along the Tethyan margin
during Arabia–Eurasia accretionary orogenesis (Meghri–Ordubad
pluton, southernmost Lesser Caucasus). Lithos 288:108–124
Rolland Y, Perincek D, Kaymakçı N, Sosson M, Barrier E, Avagyan A
(2012) Evidence for∼ 80–75 Ma subduction jump during
Anatolide–Tauride–Armenian block accretion and∼ 48 Ma
Arabia–Eurasia collision in Lesser Caucasus–East Anatolia. J
Geodyn 56:76–85
Sadıkhov, E.A., Shatova N.V., 2017. U-Pb dating (SHRIMP II) and
geodynamic condition of intrusions of the gabbro-tonalite com-
plexes of the Lok-Karabakh, Lesser Caucasus (Azerbaijan) (U-
Pb датирование (SHRIMP II) и геодинамические условия
формирования массивов габбро-тоналитового комплекса
Лок-Гарабагской зоны Малого Кавказа (Азербайджан), 69,
49-60.
Sadıkhov EA, Veliev AA, Bayramov AA, Mamedov SM, İbragimov DR
(2018) Isotope geochemical characteristics (Sm-Nd, Rb-Sr, S) and
U-Pb SHRIMP II the age of the Gedabek intrusive (Azerbaijan),
(Изотопно-геохимические характеристики (Sm-Nd, Rb-Sr, S) и
U-Pb SHRIMP II возраст Гедабекского интрузива
(Азербайджан)). Region Geol and Metallogeny 76:83–94
Şengör AMC, Yılmaz Y (1981) Tethyan evolution of Turkey: A plate
tectonic approach. Tectonophysics 75:181–241
Simmons SF, Browne PR (2000) Hydrothermal minerals and precious
metals in the Broadlands-Ohaaki geothermal system: Implications
for understanding low-sulfidation epithermal environments. Econ
Geol 95(5):971–999
Simmons SF, Christenson BW (1994) Origins of calcite in a boiling
geothermal system. Am J Sci 294(3):361–400
Simmons, S. F., White N. C. and John DA, 2005. Geological
Characteristics of Epithermal Precious and Base Metal Deposits,
Society of Economic Geologists, Inc. Economic Geology 100th
Anniversary 485–522.
Sosson M, Rolland Y, Müller C, Danelian T, Melkonyan R, Kekelia S,
Adamia S, Babazadeh V, Kangarli T, ve Avagyan A (2010)
Subductions, obduction and collision in the Lesser Caucasus
(Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia), new insights. Geol Soc Lond,
Spec Publ 340:329–352
Sosson M, Stephenson R, Sheremet Y, Rolland Y, Adamia S, Melkonian
R, Kangarlı T, Yegorova T, Avagyan A, Galoyan G, Danelian T,
Hässig M, Meijers M, Müller C, Sahakyan L, Sadradze N, Alania V,
Enukidze O, Mosar J (2016) The eastern Black Sea-Caucasus region
during the Cretaceous: New evidence to constrain its tectonic evo-
lution. Compt Rendus Geosci 348(1):23–32
1298 Page 20 of 20
Veliyev A, Bayramov A, Ibrahimov J, Mammadov S, Alizhadeh G
(2018) Geological Setting and Ore Perspective of the New
Discovered Gadir Low Sulfidation Epithermal Deposit, Gedabek
NW Flank, Lesser Caucasus, Azerbaijan. Universal J Geosci 6(3):
78–101
Vural A (2019) Evaluation of soil geochemistry data of Canca area
(Gümüşhane, Turkey) by means of inverse distance weighting
(idw) and kriging methods- preliminary findings. Bulletin Mineral
Res Explor 158:195–216
Yılmaz H, Sönmez FN, Akay E, Şener AK, Tezel Tufan S (2013) Low-
sulfidation epithermal Au-Ag mineralization in the Sındırgı District.
Balıkesir Province, Turkey Turkish J Earth Sci 22:485–522
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1298
Zonenshain LP, Pichon X (1986) Deep basins of the Black Sea and
Caspian Sea as remnants of Mesozoic back-arc basins.
Tectonophysics 123(1-4):181–211
Zürcher L, Bookstrom AA, Hammarstrom JM, Mars JC, Ludington SD,
Zientek ML, Dunlap P, Wallis JC (2019) Tectono-magmatic evolu-
tion of porphyry belts in the central Tethys region of Turkey, the
Caucasus, Iran, western Pakistan, and southern Afghanistan. Ore
Geol Rev 111(102849):1–74