砂岩型铀矿的两种成矿模式：泾川式和塔勒式

Two Metallogenic Models of Sedimentary⁃Hosted Uranium Deposit: Jingchuan and Tale Types

摘要

目前砂岩型铀矿成矿模式种类较复杂.试图从还原介质内生和外生两个角度，分析鄂尔多斯盆地泾川油气田区和塔然高勒煤田区两个特大型铀矿床的成矿条件、矿物特征、地球化学特征等，建立泾川式和塔勒式两种铀成矿模式.泾川式还原介质以烃类流体为主，为沉积成岩期后下伏烃源岩排出运移至下白垩统洛河组，与表生含氧含铀流体耦合成矿，矿体受岩层渗透性、后期断裂构造和水系展布等要素控制明显，具有矿化层多的特征，常发育十几层，受烃类流体运移影响，横向变化较大，常切穿层理；铀矿物从几微米至十几微米，分布较为均匀.塔勒式还原介质以煤屑等为主，为同沉积成岩期碎屑，近于顺层产出，矿体横向展布稳定，与地层基本一致；铀矿物颗粒大小变化大，从几微米至几百微米，分布不均匀.该认识为盆地多能源成矿响应和铀矿成矿机理研究再突破提供了新方向.

Abstract

The existing ore-forming models related to sedimentary-hosted uranium deposits have been primarily established focusing on different ore-controlling factors such as tectonics, sedimentation, and fluids. These models are diverse and complex. Over the past decades, with the comprehensive development of secondary exploration for uranium in drilling data from coalfields and oilfields, the close spatial coexistence pattern of “coal-oil-uranium” has been rapidly revealed. This paper analyzes the reducing media that constrain the enrichment of sedimentary-hosted uranium deposits from different perspectives. By systematically comparing and analyzing the ore-forming conditions, mineral characteristics, and geochemical features of the super large uranium deposits in the Jingchuan oil and gas field and the Tale coalfield in the Ordos Basin, two uranium ore-forming models, namely the Jingchuan type and the Tale type, are established. The Jingchuan type reducing media are primarily hydrocarbon fluids (such as CH₄, H₂, CO, as well as secondary H₂S, pyrite, etc.), which are mainly derived from the expulsion and migration of deep-seated hydrocarbon source rocks after the sedimentary diagenesis period to the Lower Cretaceous Luohe Formation, coupled with the ore-forming process of surface oxygenated and uranium-bearing fluids. The ore bodies in this model are notably controlled by factors such as reservoir permeability, late-stage fault structures, and hydrological distribution, often characterized by the presence of multiple mineralized layers, typically dozens or even scores of layers. Constrained by the migration range of oil and gas, they exhibit significant lateral variations and phenomena of ore bodies cutting across bedding planes. The uranium minerals are primarily asphaltic uranium ores, appearing as emulsion texture, angular texture, vein-like texture, with relatively small grains ranging from a few to tens of micrometers, occasionally reaching several tens of micrometers, and distributed relatively evenly, accompanied by minerals such as pyrite, quartz, calcite, and rutile. In contrast, the Tale type reducing media are mainly coal debris, deposited contemporaneously during the sedimentary diagenesis period, and are produced parallel to the bedding, serving as chemical barriers for the enrichment and precipitation of uranium in surface oxidizing and uranium-bearing fluids. The ore bodies in this model are subject to dual constraints from the occurrence of coal-bearing rock layers and hydrology, generally exhibiting relatively stable lateral distribution. The mineralized layers usually consist of 2 to 3 layers, with the ore layers being essentially consistent with the coal-bearing rock layers, and phenomena of cutting across bedding planes are not evident. The uranium minerals mainly include uraninite and coffinite, showing irregularly granular texture, blocky texture, vein-like texture, feather-like texture, with significant variations in particle size ranging from a few micrometers to several hundred micrometers, unevenly distributed, and accompanied by minerals such as pyrite, mica, rutile, coal debris, quartz, and calcite. These two uranium ore-forming models exhibit significant differences in ore-forming conditions and characteristics, providing not only theoretical basis for uranium exploration, but also new directions for the response of multi-energy mineralization in basins and the study of the mechanisms of the sedimentary-hosted uranium.

Graphical abstract

关键词

砂岩型铀矿 / 泾川式 / 塔勒式 / 成矿模式 / 还原介质 / 矿床学.

Key words

sedimentary⁃hosted uranium deposit / Jingchuan model / Tale model / metallogenic model / reducting material / ore deposit

砂岩型铀矿泛指赋存于沉积岩中的铀矿.砂岩型铀矿已经成为世界重要的、经济易采的铀矿类型，2021年的产量占比已经超过了63.3%（OECD， 2023）.目前，关于砂岩型铀的成矿模式取得了系列原创性认识，同时积累了大量勘查成果资料，从不同角度已建立了多种成矿模式：一是侧重于油气、煤成气对砂岩型铀矿作用影响提出了努和廷式、吐哈式、东胜式、钱家店式（张如良和丁万烈， 1994；权建平等，2007）；二是注重铀成矿经历了多期多阶段和多因素叠合特征，提出了库捷尔泰式（晏文权等，2019）、叠合成矿模式（李子颖等，2021）；三是重视表生流体作用下氧化还原和构造作用成矿，提出了伊犁式、吐哈式、东胜式、乌兰察布式、马尼特式和通辽式（张金带等，2010），以及表生流体的周期性变迁引起铀富集沉淀，提出跌宕成矿模式（Jin et al.， 2020）；四是强调深部铀源，提出了渗出铀成矿模式（李子颖等，2022）和深部溶气含铀热流体运移成矿模式（吴柏林等，2022；刘池洋等，2024）；五是根据还原介质的内生和外生、矿体形态、沉积成岩期和成岩期后等不同成因建立了卷状、板状等不同类型的成矿模式（Adams and Smith， 1981； Bonnetti et al.， 2015； Hou et al.， 2017； Cuney et al.， 2022）.新世纪以来中国学者针对国内360多个矿床，构建了111个典型铀矿床的成矿模式（秦明宽等，2024）.这些成矿模式主要是以构造、沉积、流体等不同控矿要素为侧重点建立的，成矿模式种类较多，有些矿床位于煤田和油气田叠置区，受双重还原介质的影响，成矿模式更为复杂.鉴于还原介质是该类铀元素超常富集的关键要素，以及近10年来，煤田、油田区30余万口钻孔资料二次开发利用和铀矿工程、973计划项目、国家重点研发计划项目等重大工程、项目的实施，快速揭开了中国北方中‒新生代盆地“煤‒油‒铀”空间共存规律和大规模成矿的事实.本文试图从还原介质为沉积成岩期形成和后期运移就位的角度，选择鄂尔多斯盆地油气田和煤田区互不重叠的泾川和塔然高勒两个特大型的典型铀矿床（图1），建立油气田区泾川式和煤田区塔勒式两种铀成矿模式，为铀矿勘查部署提供理论依据，也为盆地多能源成矿响应和砂岩型铀矿成矿机理研究提供了新方向.

1 泾川式

1.1　成矿条件

泾川矿床位于鄂尔多斯盆地西南缘镇原、彭阳一带，庆阳隆起的西南侧，区内地震数据解释显示从三叠系至下白垩统主要发育北西向、北北西向和北东向断裂构造，为深部上三叠统延长组深灰色、灰黑色泥页岩（烃源岩）生成的烃类流体向上运移至铀的赋矿层奠定了通道基础.地表沿断裂构造发育系列一级和次级季节性水系，为铀元素的迁移提供了载体.赋矿层为下白垩统洛河组（K₁l）旱谷、风成沙丘、丘间及沙漠湖等沉积类型，为典型沙漠沉积体系，未发育原生煤屑等有机质.上部岩性主要为砖红色、棕红色长石石英砂岩，下部主要为灰色‒灰绿色长石石英砂岩，二者整体垂向上构成砂岩型铀赋矿层的“红黑”结构（金若时等，2017；程银行等，2024）.部分灰色层截切沉积层理，为油气还原的产物，二者过渡带为砂岩型铀成矿的有利层位.钻探至灰色砂岩时泥浆池见大量的还原性气体（气泡），洛河组含矿砂岩及围岩新鲜面发育烃类运移痕迹，多沿裂缝以脉状分布，断裂带隆起区表现出强烃类改造痕迹.测试结果显示烃类等流体主要成分为CH₄、C₂H₆、H₂、H₂S等（Si et al.， 2024），为铀矿富集沉淀提供了良好的还原介质（图2a~2c），碳同位素和生物标志化合物参数表明洛河组烃类流体与下部延长组烃源岩具有亲缘关系.由于赋矿层为风成砂岩，渗透性好，烃类流体易于运移，因此该区矿化面积较大，目前根据油田钻孔资料揭示约2 000 km².盆地西缘发育大量的富铀地质体（金若时和滕雪明，2022），为盆内铀矿的形成提供了充足的铀源，水系沉积物中也见大量活跃元素的异常（写熹等，2022），也说明铀元素的迁移富集.

1.2　矿床特征

泾川铀矿矿体埋深在400~2 000 m，甚至2 000 m以深油田钻孔资料仍可以见大量的铀异常，埋深变化较大.矿层厚度0.1~280 m，变化范围大，矿化层多，多发育十几层，甚至几十层，横向延伸稳定性一般，多处可见赋矿层沿破碎带或渗透性岩层截切沉积层理（图3a），即铀成矿的“穿层等时”（Cheng et al.， 2019； 程银行等，2024）在这种地区尤为明显.泾川铀矿目前已发现6个矿体，其中泾川VI区矿体整体呈北西、北北西走向，长近 15 km，宽2~5 km，沿北西向断裂构造分布，矿体展布既受赋矿层砂体渗透性、断裂构造等影响，又受现代水系分布的制约（图4a）.

1.3　矿物特征

泾川铀矿洛河组赋矿层为风成砂岩，黏土矿物总量较低.矿体上覆有砖红色、棕红色砂岩、钙质砂岩，主要黏土矿物为伊蒙混层、伊利石、绿泥石、少量的高岭石.灰色赋矿砂岩中黏土矿物主要是高岭石、绿泥石（朱强等，2020）.铀矿物主要为沥青铀矿、少量铀石、含钛铀矿等，呈星点状、棱角状、细脉状、不规则团块状，颗粒大小变化较大，从几个微米至几十微米，多集中在十微米以下，分布较为均匀，多发育于蚀变黄铁矿表面和边部、锐钛矿解理面、石英裂隙和边部、方解石裂隙和边部、磷灰石（胶磷矿）表面以及吸附于绿泥石等黏土矿物表面等（图5a~5d）.

1.4　地球化学

铀赋矿层中沥青的δ¹³C、δ¹⁸O同位素数据显示为与有机质有关的碳酸盐和成岩碳酸盐，其中δ¹³C值为-26.0‰~-31.9‰，与下部三叠系延长组中石油以及石油中的甲烷、乙烷、丙烷、丙烯、丁烷、戊烷等的δ¹³C值（-29.0‰~-36.6‰；Si et al.， 2024）基本一致，表明赋矿层中碳的来源应为延长组烃类流体.铀矿物28个测点的电子探针分析结果显示，沥青铀矿22个点（UO₂=62.43%~86.11%， SiO₂=0.94%~10.10%），铀石2个点（UO₂=56.98%~63.89%，SiO₂=16.51%~22.55%），（含）钛铀矿4个点（UO₂=50.36%~76.39%，TiO₂=8.31%~29.53%）（赵华雷等，2020），表明铀矿物以沥青铀矿为主，含钛铀矿和铀石次之.15个含矿全岩样品U⁴⁺/U⁶⁺比值为0.92~5.12，平均为2.52（内部资料待发表）.

1.5　成矿机理

利用扫描电镜、蚀变矿物光谱扫描等手段，分析泾川铀矿赋矿层洛河组中黏土矿物组合在垂向上具有酸性、碱性流体作用强度的规律性变化，下部以高岭石、绿泥石为主，表明酸性和碱性流体共同作用；中部以绿泥石、伊蒙混层为主，高岭石次之，显示酸性流体作用强度减弱；上部以绿泥石和伊蒙混层为主，未见高岭石，反映以碱性流体为主（朱强等，2020）.泾川铀矿下部发育延长组深灰色、灰黑色泥页岩，大量的烃类流体运移至上部洛河组，为铀的富集沉淀提供了还原条件.野外钻探工程泥浆池中可见到大量气泡（图2b），岩心样品分析烃类等流体主要成分为CH₄、C₂H₆、H₂等及次生的H₂S（Si et al.， 2024），CH₄和H₂等在常温常压条件下与U⁶⁺反应不明显，甲烷与硫酸根反应会生成还原能力极强的H₂S（张莉娟等，2018），将岩层中的氧化铁还原成黄铁矿.因此，泾川铀矿赋矿层内部含烃流体富含CH₄、H₂等较强还原性介质，为Fe³⁺还原为Fe²⁺、H₂S、FeS₂（黄铁矿）等提供了还原环境，进而为表生含氧流体中U⁶⁺的吸附、还原富集沉淀提供了物质条件.S^2-、H₂S、Fe²⁺对U（Ⅵ）具有很强的还原性，其化学反应方程式为：UO₂²⁺+S^2-→UO₂+SO₄^2-、UO₂²⁺+2S^2-+Fe²⁺→UO₂+FeS₂、4UO₂²⁺+H₂S+10OH^-→4UO₂+SO₄^2-+6H₂O、UO₂²⁺+2Fe²⁺+4H⁺→U⁴⁺+2Fe³⁺+2H₂O、UO₂²⁺+Fe²⁺+3H₂O→UO₂+Fe（OH）₃+3H⁺.针对沥青铀矿微区原位U⁃Pb测年的13个测点数据显示，成矿时代介于3.68±0.5~4.47±0.6 Ma（Zhao et al.， 2021）.32个测点的U⁃Th⁃^totalPb化学年龄为0.95~26.19 Ma，平均8.49 Ma（据赵华雷等（2020）电子探针数据计算），二者均集中分布在中新世及之后.与泾川铀矿分布于渐新世‒中新世（Chen et al.， 2022）断裂构造和褶皱构造活动在时间上较为吻合.沿流体流向成矿时间逐渐变新，表明中新世以来表生流体作用对下白垩统洛河组赋矿层中铀矿的形成起关键作用.

2 塔勒式

2.1　成矿条件

塔然高勒矿床位于鄂尔多斯盆地伊盟隆起中部，东胜隆起带西缘，隆起构造为含氧含铀流体的运移提供了动力.地表发育一北北东向一级和系列次级季节性水系，表生流体较为发育，为铀元素的迁移提供了载体.赋矿层为中侏罗统直罗组（J₂z）辨状河、辨状河三角洲沉积体系，岩性主要为灰色、浅灰色砂岩夹薄煤层，并发育煤屑、草莓状黄铁矿，上覆有紫红色、褐红色、灰绿色砂岩、粉砂岩、泥质粉砂岩，二者垂向上构成砂岩型铀赋矿层的“红黑”结构（金若时等，2017；文思博等，2023；程银行等，2024）；过渡带为铀成矿的有利层位，岩层横向延伸较为稳定，为铀矿富集沉淀奠定了良好的地层条件（图2d~2f）.盆地北缘华力西期 、燕山期造山带发育大量的富铀地质体（金若时和滕雪明，2022），Th/U比值为9.36，铀迁移量较大，ΔU为-38%（ΔU=［（U⁃U₀）/U₀×100%=-38%］，U为当前铀含量，U₀为Th/U比值法计算原始铀含量），阿拉善、吕梁、秦岭等其他周缘富铀岩体迁移量均较大，ΔU为-38%~-22%（俞礽安等，2023），为盆内铀矿的形成提供了充足的铀源.

2.2　矿床特征

塔然高勒矿体整体呈北东走向，埋深在440~680 m，向南西方向埋深逐渐变深，长6~ 7 km，宽约1 km，矿层厚度1.30~7.50 m，平均值为4.33 m（俞礽安等，2023），变化较小；矿化层较少，一般1~2层，横向延伸较为稳定，位于含煤屑地层顶部（图3b），其下部仍有大量的含煤屑灰色岩层未发生矿化.矿层伽马测井异常强度自上而下有逐渐减弱的规律，沿流体流向，矿层厚度有逐渐变薄的趋势，即矿层顶板与含煤屑地层基本一致，矿层的底板与含煤屑地层有一定的夹角（程银行等，2024）.矿体展布既受赋矿层砂体展布、产状影响，又受现代水系分布的制约（图4c）.

2.3　矿物特征

上部红色砂岩中蚀变矿物主要有赤铁矿、水针铁矿、锐钛矿、方解石，黏土矿物主要以蒙皂石、伊/蒙混层为主，高岭石较少，中部灰绿色砂岩中黏土矿物主要以蒙皂石、伊蒙混层、绿泥石为主，高岭石含量较低.下部灰色含矿砂岩中黏土矿物主要以高岭石、伊蒙混层、蒙皂石为主（朱强等，2019）.铀矿物主要为铀石和沥青铀矿，呈不规则粒状、星点状、细脉状、羽状、颗粒大小变化较大，从几微米至几百微米，分布不均匀，多发育于蚀变黄铁矿表面和边部、黑云母解理面、锐钛矿解理面、煤屑裂隙、石英裂隙和边部、方解石裂隙和边部等（图5e~5h）.

2.4　地球化学

铀赋矿层岩石的δ¹³C、δ¹⁸O同位素数据显示为与有机质有关的碳酸盐和成岩碳酸盐，其中δ¹³C值为-6.6‰~-13.0‰（朱强等，2019），与伊盟隆起古生界天然气中甲烷δ¹³C值（-32.0‰~-34.4‰）和乙烷δ¹³C值（普遍大于-25.4‰，平均-24.8‰（陈敬轶等，2016））明显不同，表明碳的来源应为赋矿层有机物，参与铀成矿作用的有机质应为直罗组沉积成岩阶段产物.铀矿物20个测点的电子探针分析结果显示，铀石10个点（UO₂=70.60%~78.48%，SiO₂=15.80%~21.15%），沥青铀矿6个点（UO₂=82.67%~85.46%，SiO₂=7.86%~10.03%），（含）钛铀矿4个点（UO₂=35.24%~53.41%，TiO₂=12.23%~38.32%）（彭胜龙等，2023），与钱家店矿床具有相似性（张宇辰等，2024），表明铀矿物以铀石和沥青铀矿为主.13个含矿全岩样品U⁴⁺/U⁶⁺比值为1.46~8.91，平均为4.36（内部资料待发表）.

2.5　成矿机理

还原环境铀元素相对较难迁移，有利于矿床的保存.塔然高勒地区铀矿体下部发育多层下侏罗统延安组煤层，含矿层含有大量的煤屑等有机质.曾江萍等（2016）通过静态吸附试验对塔然高勒样品进行分析，结果显示腐殖酸对铀的富集具有明显的作用，少量的腐殖酸能使U⁶⁺吸附率达到98.79%.塔然高勒外围地区2081矿床19件溶浸分析结果显示U⁶⁺占比为3.02%~54.6%（彭云彪等，2006），显示吸附作用可能占有一定的比例.另外，前人的实验表明Fe²⁺对U⁶⁺具有很强的还原作用，在pH值小于7的酸性溶液中，黄铁矿对U⁶⁺ 的还原作用较强（张莉娟等，2018）.塔然高勒矿床中黑云母、钛铁矿等发生蚀变析出Fe²⁺，为含氧含铀流体中的U⁶⁺还原沉淀奠定了基础，在黑云母、锐钛矿的解理面中、黄铁矿的表面和边部发育大量的铀石.因此，塔然高勒矿床赋矿层内部大量的煤屑等有机质的存在，为腐殖酸、矿物蚀变析出Fe²⁺、FeS（黄铁矿）等提供了形成条件，其为表生含氧流体中U⁶⁺吸附、还原富集沉淀提供了物质条件，与盐湖锂成矿具有相似性（肖则佑等，2023）.S^2-、Fe²⁺对U（Ⅵ）具有很强的还原性，其化学反应方程式为：2FeS₂ + 15U⁶⁺_{+ 16H2O→2Fe³⁺ + 15U⁴⁺+ 4SO4^2-+ 32H⁺、2Fe²⁺ + U⁶⁺→2Fe³⁺ + U⁴⁺、 U⁶⁺+ 2e^-→U⁴⁺（TiO2/蚀变黑云母吸附）、U⁴⁺ + 2H2O + SiO2→USiO4（铀石）+ 4H⁺.塔然高勒矿床16个测点的U⁃Th⁃^totalPb化学年龄为0.96~11.39 Ma，平均5.68 Ma（据彭胜龙等（2023）电子探针数据计算）.外围同一赋矿层的杭锦旗铀矿沥青铀矿微区原位U⁃Pb测年数据显示，晚白垩世以来经历过多期成矿过程，成矿时代多小于40 Ma，尤其是中新世以来（张婉莹等，2019），沿流体流向成矿时间逐渐变新，这一成矿特征和规律与泾川铀矿基本一致.}

3 成矿模式

中国北方中‒新生代盆地铀矿与含煤岩系、含油气岩系具有密切的空间共存规律，后者为砂岩型铀矿的形成提供了还原条件，甚至在石炭、二叠系也发育富有机质地层（石刚等，2023），也会有铀成矿作用存在.有些铀矿受油气田区还原介质的影响如泾川、七个泉、克拉玛依、大庆等，有些是受煤田区还原介质影响如塔然高勒、陆海、白彦花等，有些可能是受二者的双重影响如钱家店.本文选择泾川油气田区白垩系特大型风成砂岩型铀矿，赋矿层中未发育煤屑等原生沉积成岩期有机质和塔然高勒煤田区侏罗系中特大型铀矿，赋矿层中未见有深部气田烃类流体的影响，分别建立了泾川式和塔勒式成矿模式（图6）.泾川式铀成矿作用是地表含氧含铀流体与深部烃类流体耦合富集成矿.下部三叠系延长组发育烃源岩，产生大量的烃类流体沿断裂构造运移至洛河组风成砂岩层内，储存于断裂构造和岩石空隙内，烃类流体运移距离远近、面积大小取决于岩石的渗透性和断裂构造的发育，尤其是前者.表生流体携带盆地西缘富铀体析出的U⁶⁺，通过渗流、径流等方式运移至洛河组富烃类流体的砂岩中，发生还原反应和吸附于黏土矿物而富集沉淀，之后流体沿断裂构造破碎带运移，矿体形态受烃类流体富集状态的约束，横向变化不稳定，局部很不规则，存在切穿层理的现象.塔勒式铀成矿作用是地表含氧含铀流体与赋矿层内部还原介质发生还原反应而富集成矿.中侏罗统直罗组下段灰色砂岩中发育大量的煤屑等有机质，表生流体携带盆地北缘富铀体析出的U⁶⁺，通过渗流、径流等方式运移至直罗组富煤屑的砂岩中，发生还原反应和吸附于黏土矿物而富集沉淀，矿体形态受富煤屑灰色砂岩的约束，横向变化较稳定，矿体近于顺层产出.由于铀元素较为活泼，随着含氧含铀流体的持续供给，耗散更多的有机质，同时会对先形成矿体氧化破坏，向盆地内部、深部还原环境不断迁移富集，像“雪球”一样滚动前进，形成“聚‒散‒聚”持续成矿过程.

4 结论

（1）以还原介质沉积成岩期形成（内生）和后期外部运移至铀赋矿层（外生）为主要标志建立油气田区泾川式和煤田区塔勒式两种铀成矿模式.

（2）泾川式还原介质以烃类流体为主，矿体受岩层渗透性、后期断裂构造等要素控制明显，矿化层多，常见发育十几层，甚至几十层，矿层厚度横向变化较大（几米至上百米），多见切穿沉积层理，铀矿物以沥青铀矿为主，呈星点状、棱角状，颗粒较小，从几微米至十几微米，分布较为均匀.

（3）塔勒式还原介质以煤屑等为主，为同沉积成岩期碎屑，矿体基本顺层产出，一般横向展布较为稳定，矿化层一般1~3层，与含煤屑层基本一致，铀矿物主要为铀石和沥青铀矿，呈不规则粒状、团块状、细脉状、羽状，颗粒大小变化较大，从几微米至几百微米，分布不均匀.

参考文献

[1] Adams, S. S., Smith, R. B., 1981. Geology and Recognition Criteria for Sandstone Uranium Deposits in Mixed Fluvial⁃Shallow Marine Sedimentary Sequences, South Texas. Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI), Austin. https://doi.org/10.2172/6554832

[2] Bonnetti, C., Cuney, M., Michels, R., et al., 2015. The Multiple Roles of Sulfate⁃Reducing Bacteria and Fe⁃Ti Oxides in the Genesis of the Bayinwula Roll Front⁃Type Uranium Deposit, Erlian Basin, NE China. Economic Geology, 110(4): 1059-1081. https://doi.org/10.2113/econgeo.110.4.1059

[3] Chen, J.Y., Jia, H.C., Li, Y.J., et al., 2016. Origin and Source of Natural Gas in the Upper Paleozoic of the Yimeng Uplift, Ordos Basin. Oil & Gas Geology, 37(2): 205-209 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[4] Chen, Y., Li, J. G., Miao, P. S., et al., 2022. Relationship between the Tectono⁃Thermal Events and Sandstone⁃Type Uranium Mineralization in the Southwestern Ordos Basin, Northern China: Insights from Apatite and Zircon Fission Track Analyses. Ore Geology Reviews, 143: 104792. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oregeorev.2022.104792

[5] Cheng, Y.H., Jin, R.S., Cuney, M., et al., 2024. The Strata Constraint on Large Scale Sandstone⁃Type Uranium Mineralization in Meso⁃Cenozoic Basins, Northern China. Acta Geologica Sinica, 98(7): 1953-1976 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[6] Cheng, Y. H., Wang, S. Y., Jin, R. S., et al., 2019. Global Miocene Tectonics and Regional Sandstone⁃Style Uranium Mineralization. Ore Geology Reviews, 106: 238-250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oregeorev.2019.02.003

[7] Cuney, M., Mercadier, J., Bonnetti, C., 2022. Classification of Sandstone⁃Related Uranium Deposits. Journal of Earth Science, 33(2): 236-256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12583⁃021⁃1532⁃x

[8] Feng, X.X., Jin, R.S., Sima, X.Z., et al., 2017. Uranium Source Analysis and Its Geological Significance to Uranium Metallogenic Evolution in Dongsheng Uranium Ore Field. Geology in China, 44(5): 993-1005 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[9] Hou, B. H., Keeling, J., Li, Z. Y., 2017. Paleovalley⁃ Related Uranium Deposits in Australia and China: A Review of Geological and Exploration Models and Methods. Ore Geology Reviews, 88: 201-234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oregeorev.2017.05.005

[10] Jin, R.S., 2020. Mineralization of Sandstone⁃Type Uranium Deposits in Ordos Basin. Science Press, Beijing, 106-107 (in Chinese).

[11] Jin, R.S., Cheng, Y.H., Li, J.G., et al., 2017. Late Mesozoic Continental Basin “Red and Black Beds” Coupling Formation Constraints on the Sandstone Uranium Mineralization in Northern China. Geology in China, 44(2): 205-223 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[12] Jin, R.S., Teng, X.M., 2022. Large Scale Sandstone⁃Type Uranium Mineralization in Northern China. North China Geology, 45(1): 42-57 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[13] Jin, R. S., Teng, X. M., Li, X. G., et al., 2020. Genesis of Sandstone⁃Type Uranium Deposits along the Northern Margin of the Ordos Basin, China. Geoscience Frontiers, 11(1): 215-227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2019.07.005

[14] Li, Z.Y., Liu, W.S., Li, W.T., et al., 2022. Exudative Metallogeny of the Hadatu Sandstone⁃Type Uranium Deposit in the Erlian Basin, Inner Mongolia. Geology in China, 49(4): 1009-1047 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[15] Li, Z.Y., Qin, M.K., Fan, H.H., et al., 2021. Main Progresses of Uranium Geology and Exploration Techniques for the Past Decade in China. Bulletin of Mineralogy, Petrology and Geochemistry, 40(4): 845-857 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[16] Liu, C.Y., Zhang, L., Huang, L., et al., 2024. Novel Metallogenic Modell of Sandstone⁃Type Uranium Deposits: Mineralization by Deep Organic Fluids. Earth Science Frontiers, 31(1): 368-383 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[17] OECD, 2023. Uranium 2022: Resources, Production and Demand. OECD⁃NEA/IAEA, 88-89.

[18] Peng, S.L., Tian, J.P., Guo, X.Y., et al., 2023. Characteristics and Metallogenesis of Ore⁃Bearing Sandstone in the Tarangaole Sandstone Type Uranium Deposit, Ordos Basin. Geology in China, 50(1): 264-276 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[19] Peng, Y.B., Li, Z.Y., Fang, X.H., et al., 2006. Metallogenetic Characteristics of No. 2081 Uranium Deposit in the North of Ordos Basin. Acta Mineralogica Sinica, 26(3): 349-355 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[20] Qin, M.K., Li, Z.Y., Liu, Z.Y., et al., 2024. Significant Progresses and Prospects in the Science and Technology Innovation of Uranium Geology in China since 2000. Uranium Geology, 40(2): 189-203 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[21] Quan, J.P., Fan, T.L., Xu, G.Z., et al., 2007. Effects of Hydrocarbon Migration on Sandstone⁃Type Uranium Mineralization in Basins of Northern China. Geology in China, 34(3): 470-477 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[22] Shi, G., Gong, Z., Huang, N., et al., 2023. The Main Controlling Factors of the Gas Content in the Permian Dalong Formation of the Xuanjing Area, the Lower Yangtze Region: A Case Study of Gangdi 1 Well. East China Geology, 44(1): 93-102 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[23] Si, Q. H., Teng, X. M., Zhu, Q., et al., 2024. The Origin and Migration Laws of Hydrocarbons in Uranium‐ Bearing Luohe Formation, Pengyang Area, SW Ordos Basin. Geological Journal, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1002/gj.5017

[24] Wen, S.B., Zhu, Q., Cheng, Y.H., 2023. Metallogenic Epoch of Sandstone Type Uranium Deposits in the Ordos Basin and the Temporal and Spatial Regularity of Uranium Enrichment. North China Geology, 46(3): 1-11 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[25] Wu, B.L., Liu, C.Y., Yang, S.L., et al., 2022. Mechanistic and Progress of Uranium Mineralization by Organic Minerals (Oil, Gas and Coal) in Sedimentary Basins. Journal of Northwest University (Natural Science Edition), 52(6):1044-1065 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[26] Xiao, Z.Y., Qi, F.Y., Fan, H.H., et al., 2023. Geological Characteristics and Prospecting Potential of Brine⁃Type Lithium Ores in Ganzhou Basin, Jiangxi Province. East China Geology, 44(4): 367-375 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[27] Xie, X., Bai, R.Y., Zhao, H.R., 2022. Geochemical Characteristics of Stream Sediments and Ore⁃Prospecting in Qiaomuwan Area, Anhui Province. East China Geology, 43(2): 205-216 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[28] Yan, W.Q., Zhao, Z.C., Li, W., 2019. Summary of Metallogenic Geological Characteristics of “Kujiertai” Sandstone Type Uranium Deposit in Yili Basin. Sichuan Nonferrous Metals, (4): 27-30 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[29] Yu, R.A., Jin, R.S., Li, T., et al., 2023. Analysis of Metallogenic Condition and Key Ore⁃Controlling Factor of Sandstone⁃Hosted Uranium Deposits in the Ordos Basin. Acta Geoscientica Sinica, 44(4): 689-706 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[30] Zeng, J.P., An, S.Q., Xu, T.M., et al., 2016. On Adsorption Performance of Humic Acid on Uranium. Acta Geologica Sinica, 90(12): 3563-3569 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[31] Zhang, J.D., Xu, G.Z., Lin, J.R., et al., 2010. The Implication of Six Kinds of New Sandstone⁃Type Uranium Deposits to Uranium Resources Potential in North China. Geology in China, 37(5): 1434-1449 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[32] Zhang, L.J., An, S.Q., Xu, T.M., et al., 2018. Study on Influcing Factors for Reduction Capacity of Gray⁃Green Sandstone in Ordos Sandstone⁃Type Uranium Deposits. Rock and Mineral Analysis, 37(4): 396-403 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[33] Zhang, R.L., Ding, W.L., 1994. Geological Characteristics of Nuheting⁃Type Uranium Deposit and Discussion on Its Oil, Gas, Water and Uranium Mineralization. Uranium Geology, 10(5): 257-265 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[34] Zhang, W.Y., 2019. In⁃Situ U⁃Pb Dating of SIMS and fs⁃LA⁃ICP⁃MS for Sandstone⁃Type Uranium Deposits: A Case Study of Ordos Basin and Yili Basin (Dissertation). Northwest University, Xi’an (in Chinese with English abstract).

[35] Zhao, H.L., Li, J.G., Miao, P.S., et al., 2020. Mineralogical Study of Pengyang Uranium Deposit and Its Significance of Regional Mineral Exploration in Southwestern Ordos Basin. Geotectonica et Metallogenia, 44(4): 607-618 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[36] Zhao, H. L., Li, J. G., Xiao, Z. B., et al., 2021. Determination of Formation Age (0.14 Ma) of the Pengyang Sandstone⁃Type Uranium Deposit in the Ordos Basin, China: Using Pitchblende In Situ Femtosecond LA⁃MC⁃ICP⁃MS Method. China Geology, 4(4): 747-748. https://doi.org/10.31035/cg2021008

[37] Zhu, Q., Li, J.G., Miao, P.S., et al., 2020. Characteristics of Clay Minerals in the Luohe Formation in Zhenyuan Area, Ordos Basin, and Its Uranium Prospecting Significance. Geotectonica et Metallogenia, 44(4): 619-632 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[38] Zhu, Q., Li, J.G., Yu, R.A., et al., 2019. Lithologic⁃ Lithographic Characteristics of the Upper and Lower Members of the Zhiluo Formation and Their Differential Control of Uranium Mineralization in the Tarangaole Area, Ordos Basin. Acta Geoscientica Sinica, 40(3): 456-468 (in Chinese with English abstract).

[39] Zhang, Y.C., Rong, H., Jiao, Y.Q., et al., 2024. Occurrence State of Fe⁃Ti Oxides and Its Response to Uranium Mineralization Process in Interlayer Oxidation Zone of Qianjiadian Uranium Deposit. Earth Science, 49(6): 2024-2043 (in Chinese with English abstract).

基金资助

国家重点研发计划项目(2023YFC2906700)

国家重点研发计划项目(2018YFC0604200)

自然资源部青年人才项目(自然资科技函[2022]129号)

中国地质调查局地质调查项目(DD20240116)

中国地质调查局地质调查项目(DD20230027)

中国地质调查局地质调查项目(DD20221678)

中国地质调查局地质调查项目(DD20190813)

国家自然科学基金重点支持项目(92162212)

国家重点基础研究发展计划（973计划）项目(2015CB453000)

国际地球科学计划项目(IGCP675)