Carbonates and Evaporites

, Volume 33, Issue 3, pp 403–420 | Cite as

Providing the bivariate anomaly map of Cu–Mo and Pb–Zn using combination of statistic methods in Parkam district, Iran

  • Seyyed Saeed Ghannadpour
  • Ardeshir HezarkhaniEmail author
Original Article


The U-statistic method is one of the most important univariate structural methods which considers spatial situation of samples. The U-statistic method could be combined with other methods because it devotes a new value to each sample. However, this method separates anomaly based on one variable. The goal in present study is to use and extend this method in multivariate mode. For this purpose, the U-statistic method should be combined with a multivariate method which devotes a new value to each sample based on several variables. Therefore, the U-statistic was applied on Mahalanobis distance values of samples because Mahalanobis distance is calculated based on several variables. This method is a combination of efficient U-statistic and Mahalanobis distance and is used for the first time. Combination results for Cu, Mo, Pb and Zn elements in Parkam district, Kerman, Iran, led to better performance of these two methods. Results show that samples indicated by the combination of these methods as anomalous are more regular; less dispersed and are more accurate than using just one of them. Also it was observed that combination results (especially for Cu and Mo) are closely associated with the defined zone of potassic alteration in the study area. Finally, bivariate lithogeochemical maps of the study area are provided for Cu–Mo and Pb–Zn which have been prepared using combination of the U-statistic and the Mahalanobis distance methods.


Parkam U-statistic Mahalanobis distance Multivariate mode Anomaly separating 


  1. Berberian M, King GCP (1981) Towards a paleogeography and tectonic evolution of Iran. Can J Earth Sci 18(2):210–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cheng Q (1999) Spatial and scaling modelling for geochemical anomaly separation. J Geochem Explor 65(3):175–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cheng Q, Agterberg FP, Ballantyne SB (1994) The separation of geochemical anomalies from background by fractal methods. J Geochem Explor 51:109–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cheng Q, Agterberg FP, Bonham-Carter GF (1996) A spatial analysis method for geochemical anomaly separation. J Geochem Explor 56:183–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cheng Q, Bonham-Carter GF, Hall GEM, Bajc A (1997) Statistical study of trace elements in the soluble organic and amorphous Fe-Mn phases of sacrificial sediments Sudbury Basin. 1. Multivariate and spatial analysis. J Geochem Explor 59:27–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Filzmoser P, Garrett RG, Reimann C (2005) Multivariate outlier detection in exploration geochemistry. Comput Geosci 31:579–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gent M, Menendez M, Toraño J, Torno S (2011) A review of indicator minerals and sample processing methods for geochemical exploration. J Geochem Explor 110(2):47–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ghannadpour SS, Hezarkhani A (2012) Developed software to calculate the additive constant number of average in three-variable normal logarithm. Glob J Comput Sci 2(1):7–13Google Scholar
  9. Ghannadpour SS, Hezarkhani A (2015a) Lead and zinc geochemical behavior based on geological characteristics in Parkam Porphyry Copper System, Kerman, Iran. J Cent South Univ 22:4274–4290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ghannadpour SS, Hezarkhani A (2015b) Investigation of Cu, Mo, Pb, and Zn geochemical behavior and geological interpretations for Parkam porphyry copper system, Kerman, Iran. Arab J Geosci 8(9):7273–7284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ghannadpour SS, Hezarkhani A (2015c) Comparing U-statistic and nonstructural methods for separating anomaly and generating geochemical anomaly maps of Cu and Mo in Parkam district, Kerman, Iran. Carbonates Evaporites. doi: 10.1007/s13146-015-0282-1
  12. Ghannadpour SS, Hezarkhani A (2016a) Introducing 3D U-statistic method for separating anomaly from background in exploration geochemical data with associated software development. J Earth Syst Sci 125(2):387–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ghannadpour SS, Hezarkhani A (2016b) Exploration geochemistry data-application for anomaly separation based on discriminant function analysis in the Parkam porphyry system (Iran). Geosci J 20(6):837–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ghannadpour SS, Hezarkhani A, Eshqi H (2012) Average and variance estimation programming in normal logarithmic distribution. Glob J Comput Sci 2(1):1–6Google Scholar
  15. Ghannadpour SS, Hezarkhani A, Sabetmobarhan A (2015a) Some statistical analyses of Cu and Mo variates and geological interpretations for Parkam porphyry copper system, Kerman, Iran. Arab J Geosci 8:345–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ghannadpour SS, Hezarkhani A, Maghsoudi A, Farahbakhsh E (2015b) Assessment of prospective areas for providing the geochemical anomaly maps of lead and zinc in Parkam district, Kerman, Iran. Geosci J 8(1):345–355Google Scholar
  17. Ghannadpour SS, Hezarkhani A, Sabetmobarhan A (2015b) The Parkam exploration district (Kerman, Iran): geology, alterations, and delineation of Cu- and Mo-mineralized zones using U-spatial statistic with associated software development. J Earth Sci 28(2):283–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ghorashizadeh M (1978) Development of hypogene and supergene alteration and copper mineralization patterns, Sarcheshmeh porphyry copper deposit, Iran. M.Sc. thesis, Brock University, Canada, p 223Google Scholar
  19. Goncalves MA, Mateus A, Oliveria V (2001) Geochemical anomaly separation by multifractal modeling. J Geochem Explor 72:91–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hassanzadeh J (1993) Metallogenic and tectono-magmatic events in SE sector of the Cenozoic active continental margin of Central Iran (Shahr–Babak, Kerman province). Ph.D. Thesis, University of California, Los Angeles, p 201Google Scholar
  21. Hawkes HE, Webb JS (1962) Geochemistry in mineral exploration. Harper and Row, New York, p 415Google Scholar
  22. Hezarkhani A (2006a) Mineralogy and fluid inclusion investigations in the Reagan Porphyry System, Iran, the path to an uneconomic porphyry copper deposit. J Asian Earth Sci 27(5):598–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hezarkhani A (2006b) Petrology of the intrusive rocks within the Sungun porphyry copper deposit, Azerbaijan, Iran. J Asian Earth Sci 27(3):326–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hezarkhani A, Ghannadpour SS (2015a) Exploration information analysis, first edn. Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic) press, Tehran (in Persian) Google Scholar
  25. Hezarkhani A, Ghannadpour SS (2015b) Geochemical behavior investigation based on K-means clustering (basics, concepts and case study), 1st edn. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  26. Hezarkhani A, Williams-Jones AE (1998) Controls of alteration and mineralization in the Sungun porphyry copper deposit, Iran: evidence from fluid inclusion and stable isotopes. Econ Geol 93(5):651–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jébrak M (2006) Economic geology: then and now. Geosci Can 33(2):81–93Google Scholar
  28. Li C, Ma T, Shi J (2003) Application of a fractal method relating concentrations and distances for separation of geochemical anomalies from background. J Geochem Explor 77:167–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McInnes BIA, Evans NJ, Fu FQ, Garwin S (2005) Application of thermo chronology to hydrothermal ore deposits. Rev Mineral Geochem 58(1):467–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Miesch AT (1981) Estimation of the geochemical threshold and its statistical significance. J Geochem Explor 16:49–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mohammadi-Laghab H, Taghipour N, Iranmanesh MR (2012) Dispersion pattern of Cu, Mo, Pb, Zn and Fe elements in Sara (Parkam) porphyry copper deposit, Shahr Babak. Kerman province. Iran J Geol 5(20):17–28 (in Persian with English abstract) Google Scholar
  32. Müller UU, Schick A, Wefelmeyer W (2003) Estimating the error variance in nonparametric regression by a covariate-matched U-statistic. J Theor Appl Stat 37(3):179–188Google Scholar
  33. Ramzan S, Zahid FM, Ramzan S (2013) Evaluating multivariate normality: a graphical approach. Middle-East J Sci Res 13(2):254–263Google Scholar
  34. Roshani P, Mokhtari AR, Tabatabaei SH (2013) Objective based geochemical anomaly detection—application of discriminant function analysis in anomaly delineation in the Kuh Panj porphyry Cu mineralization (Iran). J Geochem Explor 130:65–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Samani B (1998) Distribution, setting and metallogenesis of copper deposits in Iran. In: Porphyry and hydrothermal copper and gold deposits: a global Perspective. Conference Proceedings, pp 135–158Google Scholar
  36. Shahabpour J (2000) Behavior of Cu and Mo in the Sarcheshmeh porphyry Cu deposit, Kerman, Iran. Can Inst Min Metall Pet Bull 93:44–51Google Scholar
  37. Sinclair AJ (1991) A fundamental approach to threshold estimation in exploration geochemistry: probability plots revisited. J Geochem Explor 41(1):1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Singer DA, Berger VI, Moring BC (2008) Porphyry copper deposit in the world: database, map and grade and tonnage models. (USGS Open-file Report 2008–1060) US Geological Survey, DenverGoogle Scholar
  39. Taghipour N, Aftabi A, Mathur R (2008) Geology and Re-Os geochronology of mineralization of the Miduk porphyry copper deposit, Iran. Resour Geol 58(2):143–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tangestani MH, Moore F (2001) Porphyry copper potential mapping using the weights-of-evidence model in a GIS, northern Shahr-e-Babak, Iran. Aust J Earth Sci 48(5):695–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Vila T, Sillitoe RH (1991) Gold–rich porphyry systems in the Maricunga belt, northern Chile. Econ Geol 86(6):1238–1260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Xu L, Bi X, Hu R, Zhang X, Su W, Qu W, Hu Z, Tang T (2012) Relationships between porphyry Cu–Mo mineralization in the Jinshajiang-Red River metallogenic belt and tectonic activity: constraints from zircon U–Pb and molybdenite Re–Os geochronology. Ore Geol Rev 48:460–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zuo R (2011) Identifying geochemical anomalies associated with Cu and Pb–Zn skarn mineralization using principal component analysis and spectrum-area fractal modeling in the Gangdese Belt, Tibet (China). J Geochem Explor 111:13–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Seyyed Saeed Ghannadpour
    • 1
  • Ardeshir Hezarkhani
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Mining and Metallurgical EngineeringAmirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic)TehranIran

Personalised recommendations