Problems of Ontogeny and Phylogeny of Ores

A. A. Sidorov and A. V. Volkov*

Institute of Geology of Ore Deposits, Petrography, Mineralogy, and Geochemistry, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow,
Russia

e-mail: kolyma@igem.ru; tma2105@mail.ru

Received December 8, 2014

Abstract—The ontogeny and phylogeny of ore-bearing elements and minerals are closely related to sedimen-
tation, magmatism, and metamorphism. Previously, this problem was considered in works by D.P. Grigor’ev,
D.V. Rundkvist, and other geologists. By ontogeny, we mean the “fate” of elements and minerals, and by phy-
logeny, the development of mineral associations and deposits. This article considers the history of ore ontogeny
and phylogeny studies by the example of ore deposits. The example of gold and silver demonstrates the diver-
sity of ontogeny and phylogeny forms most illustratively because accumulations of these minerals, different in
terms of scale, were registered in all ore “families”—jaspillitic, sulfidic, and polymetallic. It is rather difficult
to determine the boundaries of the above families because they form in different physicochemical conditions.
Ore formational analysis is a necessary initial operation to study regularities in the distribution of ore matter, as
well as to understand the ontogeny and phylogeny of elements and minerals in the earth’s crust. The elaboration
of the theory of ontogeny and phylogeny, as well as the identification of regularities of the intensity and exten-
sity of ore formation, will make it possible to create new multidimensional classifications of ore deposits for
the purposes of theoretical and practical analysis.

Keywords: ontogeny, phylogeny, classification, ore formation, analysis, gold, silver, deposit.

DOI: 10.1134/S1019331616010044

Pleiades Publishing home page | journal home page | top

If you have any problems with this server, contact webmaster.