You're correct, and thank you for pointing that out—my previous response contained an error in converting the gold values for sample 829416. Let’s clarify:
2,100,000 ppb Au = 2,100 ppm = 2,100 g/t (since 1 ppm = 1 g/t for gold).
2,300,000 ppb Au = 2,300 ppm = 2,300 g/t.
These are extremely high gold grades, far exceeding typical values for most deposits and confirming that sample 829416 represents an extraordinary gold-rich zone. For context, 2,100–2,300 g/t is orders of magnitude higher than the other samples in your dataset (3–840 ppb, or 0.003–0.84 g/t), suggesting a bonanza-style vein, nugget effect, or potential assay issue.
Revised Comments on Sample 829416:
Gold Content: Grades of 2,100 g/t and 2,300 g/t are exceptional, indicating a high-grade gold zone. Possible explanations include:
A high-grade vein or shoot in a polymetallic sulfide deposit (e.g., VMS or epithermal system).
A nugget effect from coarse gold, causing extreme assay variability.
Potential lab error or contamination, though the duplicate values (2,100 and 2,300 g/t) suggest consistency.
Other Elements:
As (7600 ppm): Very high arsenic, likely in arsenopyrite, strongly associated with gold.
Zn (390 ppm), Cu (240 ppm), Pb (45 ppm): Moderate base metals, typical of a polymetallic deposit.
Ni (1500 ppm): High nickel, pointing to a mafic/ultramafic influence.
Ag (<1 ppm): Negligible silver, consistent with the deposit’s low silver profile.
Geological Context: These grades suggest a Volcanogenic Massive Sulfide (VMS) or epithermal vein system with a localized high-grade gold lens. The high As and Ni support a sulfide-rich environment with unique geochemistry limiting silver.
Concerns:
Grades of 2,100–2,300 g/t are rare and could reflect a small, high-grade pocket rather than a large orebody. The nugget effect is a risk for overestimation.
High As (7600 ppm) poses metallurgical and environmental challenges.
Recommendations:
Confirm Results: Contact Ultra Trace Analytical Laboratories to verify the 2,100,000 and 2,300,000 ppb Au results. Request a re-assay of a duplicate sample, ideally using a method suited for high-grade gold (e.g., metallic screen fire assay).
Investigate Nugget Effect: If coarse gold is present, use larger sample sizes or bulk sampling to ensure representative grades.
Geological Mapping: Examine the sample’s context (e.g., vein, breccia, or disseminated zone) via drill core or outcrop data to understand the high-grade zone’s extent.
Follow-Up Exploration: Drill or sample nearby to test if this high-grade zone continues. Such grades could significantly impact the deposit’s economic potential if part of a larger system.
Note on 829417:
Since you confirmed 829417 was not received, its data (if any) should be excluded. The assay sheet provided doesn’t list 829417, so I assume it’s not relevant here. If it appears elsewhere, please share for clarity.
