Carbonates and Evaporites

, Volume 32, Issue 2, pp 155–166 | Cite as

Comparing U-statistic and nonstructural methods for separating anomaly and generating geochemical anomaly maps of Cu and Mo in Parkam district, Kerman, Iran

Original Article


In applied geochemistry, obtaining quantitative descriptions of geochemical patterns and identifying geochemical anomalies are important. To identify and separate geochemical anomalies, several statistical methodologies (nonstructural and structural) are presented by researchers. In this study, four nonstructural methods including threshold assessment method based on median and standard deviation, median absolute deviation (MAD), P.N product and Sinclair’s method are selected first and then U-statistic is considered as a structural method to compare their performance. Subsequently, the best method is used to assess prospective areas of Parkam district. Results show that P.N and Sinclair’s methods are not always efficient. MAD method reduced the background well and roughly increased the correlation factor of points. However, U-statistic method includes both mentioned advantages meaning in addition to reducing outlier data effect, it regularizes anomalous values and also their dispersion is reduced significantly. It is possible to determine anomaly areas according to anomalous samples positioning so that denser areas are more important. Finally, lithogeochemical map of study area is generated for copper and molybdenum. In this map, the Cu mineralization which is delineated by this method is closely associated with the defined potassic alteration zone (according to alteration map of the study area), and also, the delineated Mo mineralization is exactly associated with the phyllic alteration and is spatially conformable with the zone defined for it.


Parkam U-statistic P.N product MAD Anomaly map Sinclair’s method Cu and Mo 


  1. Aral H, Sarac C (1988) Partitioning geochemical populations by Sinclair’s method. Commun Fac Sci Univ Ank Ser C 6:313–323Google Scholar
  2. Berberian M, King GC (1981) Towards a paleogeography and tectonic evolution of Iran. Can J Earth Sci 18:210–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cheng Q (1999) Spatial and scaling modelling for geochemical anomaly separation. J Geochem Explor 65(3):175–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cheng Q, Agterberg FP, Ballantyne SB (1994) The separation of geochemical anomalies from background by fractal methods. J Geochem Explor 51:109–130 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cheng Q, Agterberg FP, Bonham-Carter GF (1996) A spatial analysis method for geochemical anomaly separation. J Geochem Explor 56:183–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 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 surficial sediments, Sudbury Basin. 1. Multivariate and spatial analysis. J Geochem Explor 59:27–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Darabi-Golestan F, Ghavami-Riabi R, Khalokakaie R, Asadi-Haroni H, Seyedrahimi-Nyaragh M (2013) Interpretation of lithogeochemical and geophysical data to identify the buried mineralized area in Cu-Au porphyry of Dalli-Northern Hill. Arab J Geosci 6(11):4499–4509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 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
  9. Ghannadpour SS (2013) Geochemical studies of porphyry copper ore deposit of Parkam, Tehran. MS Thesis, Amirkabir University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  10. Ghannadpour SS, Hezarkhani A (2012) A developed software to calculate the additive constant number of average in three-variable normal logarithm. Glob J Comput Sci 2(1):1–6Google Scholar
  11. Ghannadpour SS, Hezarkhani A (2014) Investigation of Cu, Mo, Pb, and Zn geochemical behavior and geological interpretations for Parkam porphyry copper system, Kerman, Iran. Arab J Geosci. doi: 10.1007/s12517-014-1732-0 Google Scholar
  12. Ghannadpour SS, Hezarkhani A (2015) Exploration geochemistry data-application for anomaly separation based on discriminant function analysis in the Parkam porphyry system (Iran). Geosci J (accepted)Google Scholar
  13. Ghannadpour SS, Hezarkhani A, Eshqi H (2012) Average and variance estimation programming in normal logarithmic distribution. Glob J Comput Sci 2(1):7–13Google Scholar
  14. Ghannadpour SS, Mokhtari AR, Hezarkhani A, Fathianpour N (2013) Modification of Sinclair’s mixed statistical populations algorithm based on probability plots. J Anal Numer Method Min Eng 3(5):28–37 (in Persian with English abstract) Google 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. doi: 10.1007/s12303-014-0064-0 Google Scholar
  17. Ghavami-Riabi R, Seyedrahimi-Niaraq MM, Khalokakaie R, Hazareh MR (2010) U-spatial statistic data modeled on a probability diagram for investigation of mineralization phases and exploration of shear zone gold deposits. J Geochem Explor 104(1):27–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gonçalves MA, Mateus A, Oliveira V (2001) Geochemical anomaly separation by multifractal modeling. J Geochem Explor 72(2):91–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hawkes HE, Webb JS (1962) Geochemistry in mineral exploration. Harper and Row, New York 415 p Google Scholar
  20. 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
  21. 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
  22. Hezarkhani A, Ghannadpour SS (2015) Exploration information analysis, first edn. Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic) press, Tehran (in Persian with English abstract) Google Scholar
  23. Jébrak M (2006) Economic geology: then and now. Geosci Can 33(2):81–93Google Scholar
  24. Lepeltier C (1969) A simplified statistical treatment of geochemical data by graphical representation. Econ Geol 64:538–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sinclair AJ (1976) Application of probability graphs in mineral exploration. The Association of Exploration Geichemistry, Special vol 4, 95 pGoogle Scholar
  26. Sinclair AJ (1991) A fundamental approach to threshold estimation in exploration geochemistry: probability plots revisited. J Geochem Explor 41(1):1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 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
  28. Xu L, Bi X, Hu R (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

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

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

Personalised recommendations