Geochemical Study of Heavy Mineral 

Concentrates from the Northeastern 

Part of the Greenville 1°X2° 

Quadrangle, South Carolina 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1983 
AVAILABILITY OF BOOKS AND MAPS OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Instructions on ordering publications of the U.S. Geological Survey, along with prices of the last offerings, are given in the 

current-year issues of the monthly catalog "New Publications of the U.S. Geological Survey." Prices of available U.S. Geological 

Survey publications released prior to the current year are listed in the most recent annual "Price and Availability List." Publications 

that are listed in various U.S. Geological Survey catalogs (see back inside cover) but not listed in the most recent annual "Price 

and Availability List" are no longer available. 

Prices of reports released to the open files are given in the listing "U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Reports," updated 

monthly, which is for sale in microfiche from U.S. Geological Survey Book and Open-File Report Sales, Box 25425, Denver, CO 

80225. Reports released through the NTIS may be obtained by writing to the National Technical Information Service, U.S. 

Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA 22161; please include NTIS report number with inquiry. 

Ord~r U.S. Geological Survey publications by mail or over the counter from the offices given below. 

BY MAIL 

Books 

Professional Papers, Bulletins, Water-Supply Papers, 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, Circulars, publications 

of general interest (such as leaflets, pamphlets, booklets), single copies 

of Earthquakes & Volcanoes, Preliminary Determination of Epicenters, 

and some miscellaneous reports, including some of the foregoing series 

that have gone out of print at the Superintendent of Documents, are 

obtainable by mail from 

U.S. Geological Survey, Book and Open-File Report Sales 

Box 25425 

Denver, CO 80225 

Subscriptions to periodicals (Earthquakes & Volcanoes and 

Preliminary Determination of Epicenters) can be obtained ONLY from 

the 

Superintendent of Documents 

Government Printing Office 

Washington, D.C. 20402 

(Check or money order must be payable to Superintendent of 

Documents.) 

Maps 

For maps, address mail orders to 

U.S. Geological Survey, Map Sales 

Box 25286 

Denver, CO 80225 

Residents of Alaska may order maps from 

U.S. Geological Survey, Map Sales 

101 Twelfth Ave. - Box 12 

Fairbanks, AK 99701 

OVER THE COUNTER 

Books 

Books of the U.S. Geological Survey are available over the 

counter at the following U.S. Geological Survey Public Inquiries 

Offices, all of which are authorized agents of the Superintendent of 

Documents: 

• ANCHORAGE, Alaska-Rm. 101, 4230 University Dr. 

• ANCHORAGE, Alaska-Federal Bldg., Rm. E-146, 701 C St. 

• DENVER, Colorado-Federal Bldg., Rm. 169, 1961 Stout St. 

• LAKEWOOD, Colorado-Federal Center, Bldg. 810 

• MENLO PARK, California-Bldg. 3 (Stop 533), Rm. 3128, 345 

Middlefield Rd. 

• RESTON, Virginia-503 National Center, Rm. 1C402, 12201 

Sunrise Valley Dr. 

• SALT LAKE CITY, Utah-Federal Bldg., Rrn. 8105, 125 South 

State St. 

• SAN FRANCISCO, California-Customhouse, Rm. 504, 555 

Battery St. 

• SPOKANE, Washington-U.S. Courthouse, Rm. 678, West 920 

Riverside Ave. 

• WASHINGTON, D.C.-Main Interior Bldg., 2600 corridor, 

18th and C Sts., NW. 

Maps 

Maps may be purchased over the counter at the U.S. Geological 

Survey offices where books are sold (all addresses in above list) and at 

the following U.S. Geological Survey offices: 

• ROLLA, Missouri-1400 Independence Rd. 

• DENVER, Colorado-Map Distribution, Bldg. 810, Federal 

Center 

• FAIRBANKS, Alaska-New Federal Bldg., 101 Twelfth Ave. 
Geochemical Study of Heavy Mineral 

Concentrates from the Northeastern 

Part of the Greenville 1°X2° 

Quadrangle, South Carolina 

By JOHN C. JACKSON and WILLIAM J. MOORE 

Analytical data for heavy mineral concentrate samples reveal 

geochemically anomalous areas within the Inner Piedmont 

physiographic province of South Carolina 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1983 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

MANUEL LUJAN, Jr., Secretary 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Dallas L. Peck, Director 

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes 

only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government 

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1992 

For sale by 

Book and Open-File Report Sales 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Federal Center, Box 25425 

Denver, CO 80225 

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data 

Jackson, John C. (John Carl), 1959-

Geochemical study of heavy mineral concentrates from the northeastern part 

of the Greenville 1°X2° quadrangle, South Carolina I by John C. Jackson 

and William J. Moore. 

p. em. - (U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1983) 

Includes bibliographical references. 

Supt. of Docs. no.: I 19.3:1983 

1. Heavy minerals-South Carolina-Analysis. 2. Geochemistry-South 

Carolina. 3. Piedmonts (Geology)-South Carolina. I. Moore, William J. 

(William Joseph), 1938- . II. Title. Ill. Series. 

QE75.B9 no. 1983 

[QE364.2.H4] 

553.4'09757'2-dc20 91-13747 

CIP 
CONTENTS 

Abstract 1 

Introduction 1 

Previous Work 2 

Acknowledgments 6 

Geographic Setting 6 

Geologic Setting 6 

Sample Collection and Preparation 7 

Analytical Methods 7 

Discussion 8 

Distribution of Selected Elements 8 

Barium 8 

Beryllium 8 

Bismuth 9 

Boron 9 

Chromium 9 

Cobalt 9 

Copper 9 

Gold 9 

Lanthanum 12 

Lead 15 

Nickel 15 

Niobium 16 

Scandium 17 

Silver 18 

Thorium 19 

Tin 20 

Vanadium 24 

Yttrium 25 

Zinc 26 

Conclusions 26 

References Cited 34 

FIGURES 

1. Map showing location of study area and location and geologic setting of the 

Greenville 1 ox 2° quadrangle, South Carolina 2 

2. Map showing distribution of heavy-mineral concentrate sample locations across 

the study area, major drainages, and selected geographical locations 3 

3. Generalized tectonic map of the Greenville 1 ox 2° quadrangle showing regional 

metamorphic ages for various thrust sheets and area of sample coverage 4 

4. Map showing mines, prospects, and occurrences in the study area 5 

Contents Ill 
IV Contents 

5. Histograms for 19 selected elements showing frequency distribution, median 

reporting intervals, and range of intervals used on distribution maps (figs. 

6-28) of the study area 10 

6, 7. Distribution maps of the study area for: 

6. Barium 12 

7. Beryllium 13 

8. Multiple-element distribution map of the study area for boron, beryllium, and 

tin 14 

9-11. Distribution maps of the study area for: 

9. Bismuth 15 

10. Boron 16 

11. Chromium 17 

12. Multiple-element distribution map of the study area for chromium, nickel, and 

cobalt 18 

13-23. Distribution maps of the study area for: 

13. Cobalt 19 

14. Copper 20 

15. Gold 21 

16. Lanthanum 22 

17. Lanthanum >2,000 ppm and monazite contours of Overstreet 

(1968) 23 

18. Lead 24 

19. Nickel 25 

20. Niobium 26 

21. Scandium 27 

22. Silver 28 

23. Thorium 29 

24. Multiple-element distribution map of the study area for thorium and 

yttrium 30 

25-28. Distribution maps of the study area for: 

25. Tin 31 

26. Vanadium 32 

27. Yttrium 33 

28. Zinc 34 

TABLE 

1. Ranges and median concentrations for 19 elements in heavy mineral concentrates from the northeastern part of the Greenville 1°X2° quadrangle, South 

Carolina, compared with average values for granite, shale, and basalt 7 
Geochemical Study of Heavy Mineral Concentrates 

from the Northeastern Part of the Greenville 1°X2° 

Quadrangle, South Carolina 

By John C. Jackson and William J. Moore 

Abstract 

A geochemical investigation of heavy mineral 

concentrate samples from the northeastern part of the 

Greenville 1°X2° quadrangle was conducted to aid in the 

assessment of the mineral resource potential of the 

region . Samples were analyzed spectrographically, and 

element distribution maps were made for 19 selected 

elements (barium, beryllium, bismuth, boron, chromium, 

cobalt, copper, gold, lanthanum, lead, nickel, niobium, 

scandium, silver, thorium, tin, vanadium, yttrium, and 

zinc). Areas revealing anomalous concentrations of tin, 

beryllium, barium, thorium, and the rare earth elements 

lanthanum and yttrium are identified as possibly 

warranting additional study. Lanthanum and thorium 

values are consistently high in a large part of the study 

area, and thorium and yttrium values are associated in one 

region; monazite was identified in concentrates from 

throughout the study area. Values for certain lithophile 

elements, including tin, beryllium, and boron, are higher 

in concentrates from the northeastern part of the study 

area, where anomalous tin and beryllium values are 

associated. Cassiterite was identified in samples 

containing anomalous amounts of tin. The distribution of 

several elements, including tin, niobium, and vanadium, 

appears to be lithotectonically controlled and conforms 

generally with the thrust sheet boundaries that underlie 

the study area. 

INTRODUCTION 

This study is a regional geochemical reconnaissance 

of a part of the Inner Piedmont physiographic province of 

South Carolina (fig. 1). The emphasis of our interpretations 

is placed on element distribution maps that highlight those 

areas containing the most elevated values for 19 selected 

elements. Of primary interest are regions within the study 

area that reveal on the distribution maps a clustering of 

Manuscript approved for publication March 15, 1991. 

anomalous values for certain elements; this clustering 

indicates that a more rigorous sampling effort may be 

justified in those areas. Also, isolated single-element and 

multiple-element anomalies that are not a part of any 

obvious regional trend are reported for a number of 

locations, but these are given limited consideration. 

The heavy mineral concentrate samples used for this 

study represent an area of about 4,000 km2 (fig. 2). This 

regional collection of heavy mineral concentrates lends 

itself more to a comparison with regional geologic 

structures than to a detailed geologic map, given the 

relatively large size of the drainage basins that the collection 

covers and the variety of rock types that the samples 

represent. The geologic framework used for this report is 

shown on a generalized tectonic map (fig. 3) of the 

Greenville 1 oX 2° quadrangle prepared by Nelson (1988, 

fig. 5) and Nelson and others (1987). 

Previous reports of mineral resource occurrences 

within the study area are extremely limited (fig. 4). Perhaps 

the most noteworthy are the numerous occurrences and 

prospects of the rare-earth-bearing mineral monazite ((RE, 

Th)P04 ) in this region. Monazite was mined from several of 

the small prospects found within the study area (fig. 4) in 

the early 1900's, although production was minimal (Sloall, 

1908). Production of gold from the prospects shown on 

figure 4 was also minimal. Total historic gold production in 

Greenville and Spartanburg Counties was about 2,200 troy 

ounces (U.S. Bureau of the Mint, 1882-83, 1884-1906), 

but most of this production came from the Wolf and Tyger 

placers on the east bank of the Middle Tyger River near the 

Spartanburg-Greenville County line, northeast of the study 

area (not shown on fig. 4) (McCauley and Butler, 1966). 

This report supplements a quadranglewide assessment prepared under the Conterminous United States 

Mineral Resource Assessment Program (CUSMAP) of the 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Assessment of mineral 

resources under this program routinely employs semiquantitative spectrographic analyses of heavy mineral 

Introduction 
86° 

34° 

KENTUCKY / 

TENNESSEE ------

( 

\ 

\ 

GEORGIA 

VIRGINIA -------- CAROLINA 

SOUTH 

100 MILES 

EXPLANATION 

............._ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate 

Intrusive contact 

Figure 1. Location of study area (shaded) and 

location and geologic setting of the Greenville 

1°X2° quadrangle, South Carolina. GSTS, Great 

Smoky thrust sheet; BRT, Blue Ridge thrust 

stack, which includes the Richard Russell, 

Young Harris, Helen, and Tallulah Falls thrust 

sheets; IPT, Inner Piedmont thrust stack, which 

includes the Chauga-Walhalla thrust complex 

concentrates of stream sediments in conjunction with other 

geochemical, geological, and geophysical data. To reduce 

costly and time-consuming field sampling for this study, 

608 pan concentrate samples were selected from archived 

samples collected by the USGS in the early 1950's (fig. 2). 

These samples were reprocessed by using heavy liquid and 

magnetic separation methods, then analyzed spectrographically. 

and the Six Mile, Laurens, and Paris Mountain 

thrust sheets; KM, Kings Mountain belt; CS, 

Carolina slate belt; K, Kiokee belt; GST, Great 

Smoky thrust fault; HT, Hayesville and other 

thrust faults; BT, Brevard thrust fault; Lo, 

Lowndesville shear zone. Belts modified from 

King (1955), Overstreet and Bell (1965a,b), and 

Hatcher (1972). 

Previous Work 

In the early 1950's, several thousand pan concentrates were collected by the USGS to appraise fluvial 

placers in the Southeastern United States as possible sources 

for rare earth elements, uranium, and thorium in monazite 

(Overstreet, 1967; Overstreet and others, 1968; Caldwell 

and White, 1973; Cuppels and White, 1973). On the basis 

2 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1°xr Quadrangle, South Carolina 
20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

......____.._ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; 

dashed where inferred; queried 

where questionable 

--Intrusive contact 

Sample location 

Figure 2. Distribution of heavy-mineral concentrate sample locations across the study area showing major drainages and 

selected geographical locations. See Overstreet and others (1968, pl. 8) and jackson and Adrian (1991) for more detailed 

locations. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

of this work, an area between the Savannah and Catawba 

Rivers, N.C. and S.C., was reported as having the highest 

potential for monazite deposits in the Inner Piedmont 

(Overstreet and others, 1968). Furthur investigations of 

monazite in fluvial placers and granitic rocks of the Southeastern United States by Mertie (1975, 1979) defined three 

subparallel monazite belts, the longest of which extends 

from Virginia to Alabama and includes the areas of 

monazite-bearing concentrates reported by Overstreet and 

others (1968). Locations of monazite-bearing saprolite or 

unweathered granite reported by Mertie ( 1979) are shown in 

figure 4 as occurrences. 

One hundred and forty of the concentrate samples 

collected by the USGS from the monazite-belt area of the 

Inner Piedmont were analyzed spectrographically; the 

results are summarized by Overstreet and others (1968). 

These analyses evaluated the monazite placers for possible 

economic concentrations of tin, tungsten, niobium, and 

Introduction 3 
CJ Studyarea 

20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

m -365Ma 

............... Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; [Zj -344Ma 

dashed where inferred; queried 

where questionable 

Intrusive contact 

Q Granitic rock-Shown only where 

rock covers a large area or where 

tectonic bountadires are obscured 

CJ -365 Ma or possibly 410-430 Ma 

bd 312-388 Ma 

BLUE RIDGE 

[lJ Tallulah Falls thrust sheet 

INNER PIEDMONT 

m Paris Mountain thrust sheet 

m Laurens thrust sheet 

[TI Six Mile thrust sheet 

JC-WJ Chauga-Walhalla thrust complex 

SOUTHEAST OF 

LOWNDESVILLE SHEAR ZONE 

~ Charlotte thrust sheet 

Figure 3. Generalized tectonic map of the Greenville 1°X2° quadrangle, South Carolina, showing interpreted regional 

metamorphic ages for various thrust sheets and area of sample coverage. Tectonic features from Nelson and others, 1987; 

metamorphic ages from Nelson, 1988, fig. 5. 

4 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1°xr Quadrangle, South Carolina 
20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage .A. Monazite occurrence (Mertie, 1979) 

............... Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; X Gold mine (Sloan, 1908) 

dashed where inferred; queried X Gold prospect (Sloan, 1908) where questionable 

Intrusive contact 0 Beryl occurrence (Hatcher, 1978) 

• Monazite prospect (Sloan, 1908) • Copper prospect (Hatcher, 1978) 

Figure 4. Mineral mines, prospects, and occurrences in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic 

features. 

tantalum. Traces of tin and niobium were detected in a 

number of samples, but tungsten and tantalum were not. 

Ilmenite, the predominant heavy mineral in the concentrates, was determined to be responsible for most of the 

niobium but not to be economic. Tin was detected in 43 of 

these samples, and 39 of the 43 were from the North and 

South Carolina Piedmont. Beryllium was associated commonly with tin in many of these samples, and Overstreet 

and others (1968, p. 73) suggested that its presence indicates a common source for the tin-bearing and berylliumbearing minerals in the samples. However, no cassiterite 

(Sn02) was recognized in the concentrates (Caldwell, 1962; 

Cuppels, 1962; Theobald, 1962). 

A study of minor elements in magnetite from pan 

concentrates by Theobald and others ( 1967) demonstrated 

that the regional distribution of certain trace elements, 

including Ba, Be, Cr, Cu, Pb, Mn, Sn, Ti, V, and Zn, was 

controlled by detrital magnetite that contained high amounts 

of those elements. For example, Theobald and others noted 

that the distribution of tin and beryllium was controlled by 

Introduction 5 
specific postkinematic granitic rocks containing magnetite 

having high amounts of those elements. Because tin was 

detected in 284 of 291 magnetite samples, Overstreet and 

others (1968, p. 73) reasoned that, in the absence of 

cassiterite, tin-enriched magnetite may account for the 

spectrographically determined tin encountered in their 

study. 

Exploration interest in certain lithophile elements, 

especially tin, in the Charlotte 1 ox 2° quadrangle was 

generated by the report of coarse-grained, detrital cassiterite 

in pan concentrates of alluvium from nearly 40 stream sites 

southwest of Shelby, N.C. (D' Agostino and Whitlow, 

1985). In subsequent work, Gair (1986) defined a broad, 

northeast-trending belt of moderate potential for tin that is 

generally coincident with the trend of the Kings Mountain 

belt. Some of these occurrences, traditionally treated as 

micaceous pegmatites (Griffitts and Olson, 1953), were 

found to be stratiform (Carr and others, 1984; Rowe, 1987). 

The apparent strike continuation of the zone of tin-bearing 

rocks into the Greenville 1 ox 2° quadrangle gave impetus to 

test for similar geochemical signatures in the previously 

collected heavy mineral concentrates from the study area. 

Acknowledgments 

We thank Jesse W. Whitlow, whose careful cataloging and archiving of the samples used in this study enabled 

us to make expedient use of them. We appreciate the 

assistance of James Marlowe in drafting the figures and the 

analyses by John Evans on the scanning electron microscope and by John Hosterman on the X-ray diffractometer. 

We also greatly appreciate the helpful reviews of Frank 

Lesure, Andrew Grosz, Gary Curtin, and Terry Klein. 

GEOGRAPHIC SETTING 

The study area is located in the northeastern part of 

the Greenville 1 ox 2° quadrangle and includes the generally 

east- and south-flowing Savannah, Reedy, Rocky, Saluda, 

Enoree, and Tyger Rivers and their tributaries. Local relief 

in this gently rolling part of the Piedmont province is 

generally less than 300 m but reaches 600 m at Paris 

Mountain, S.C., near the northern edge of the area. 

GEOLOGIC SETTING 

The heavy mineral concentrate samples collected for 

this study represent the heavy resistate minerals derived 

from rocks of the Inner Piedmont physiographic province 

(fig. 1). The Inner Piedmont is separated from the Blue 

Ridge province to the northwest by the Brevard thrust fault 

and from the Charlotte belt to the southeast by the Lowndesville shear zone. The rocks in the study area have undergone 

multiple events of metamorphism and deformation and 

contain a wide variety of metamorphic rock types that have 

been subjected to continuous weathering and erosion probably since before Late Cretaceous time (Overstreet and 

others, 1968, p. 29). A saprolite layer, commonly tens of 

meters thick, is the source of much of the present detritus in 

the stream channels. The geologic relations within the study 

area are complex (fig. 3) and have been the subject of recent 

investigations by the USGS (Nelson and others, 1987, 

1989; Nelson, 1988). 

According to Nelson (1988, p. 13), the Inner Piedmont is underlain by four, possibly five, thrust sheets; in 

order of ascending structural position, these are the ChaugaWalhalla thrust complex (possibly two different sheets), the 

Six Mile thrust sheet, the Paris Mountain thrust sheet, and 

the Laurens thrust sheet. Nelson (1988, p. 13) states that 

these assemblages appear to have been subjected to regional 

metamorphism at progressively later intervals from west to 

east. He estimated that the Chauga-Walhalla thrust complex 

and the Six Mile thrust sheet probably were metamorphosed 

at about 365 Ma and that the Laurens and Paris Mountain 

thrust sheets were metamorphosed later, at about 344 Ma 

(fig. 3). The rocks of the three easternmost thrust sheets of 

the Inner Piedmont found within the study area underwent 

mostly sillimanite-muscovite-grade metamorphism, but 

locally within the Six Mile sheet, rocks were subjected to 

kyanite-grade metamorphism (Nelson, 1988, p. 9). Only a 

small part of the Chauga-Walhalla thrust complex is found 

in the sampling area, and it also was subjected to kyanitegrade metamorphism (Griffin, 1975). 

Each of these major lithotectonic units has a distinctive assemblage of rock types, which have been described in 

detail by Nelson and others (1989). The Laurens sheet is 

primarily a layered biotite gneiss, interlayered with biotite 

schist that locally grades to sillimanite schist. The Paris 

Mountain thrust sheet is composed primarily of sillimanite 

schist. Minor amphibolite also occurs in both these sheets. 

The Six Mile thrust sheet consists of many rock types; the 

most abundant includes various schists and gneisses. The 

small part of the Chauga-Walhalla thrust complex covered 

by the study area is principally hornblende gneiss and 

amphibolite. Compositional layering occurs in each of these 

sheets at all scales. 

Extensive areas of granitic rocks are present throughout the study area (fig. 3) and include layered or banded 

granitic gneisses containing bodies of syn- or posttectonic 

granitoids. These granitic rocks have obscured tectonic 

borders and intrusive contacts locally. Large areas of 

granite that are interlayered with other metamorphic rock 

types within the thrust sheets (Nelson and others, 1989) are 

not shown on figure 3. Nelson (1988, p. 7) states that 

granite plutons constitute as much as 50 percent of the 

volume of the Paris Mountain thrust sheet, but these plutons 

6 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1 ox 2° Quadrangle, South Carolina 
were not shown on the tectonic map (Nelson and others, 

1987) that was used as a framework for this study. Pegmatite bodies, generally discordant with the foliation of the 

host rocks, are present throughout the study area. 

SAMPLE COLLECTION AND PREPARATION 

All of the samples used in this study were panned by 

D.W. Caldwell or N.P. Cuppels in 1952. The availability of 

these samples precluded the need for labor-intensive resampling. The 608 samples represent 535 sample sites; the 

remainder are replicates. The distribution of the concentrate 

samples is reasonably even within the study area, and the 

average area of the drainage basins sampled is about 7.5 

km2

. 

As described by Overstreet and others (1968, p. 

51-53), these detrital heavy mineral concentrates were 

prepared by panning samples of gravel or sand dug from 

riffles in the active channels of small streams. The samples 

were wet sieved through a 1/s-in. screen; the oversized 

material was discarded prior to panning a volume of 

material that roughly filled a 16-in.-diameter stainless steel 

gold pan. Between 5 and 20 percent quartz was left in the 

concentrate to avoid loss of heavy minerals in the final 

stages of panning. 

For this study, the low density minerals including 

quartz and feldspar were removed by floatation in bromoform (2.85 g/cm3

). The ferromagnetic and strongly paramagnetic fractions of the samples were separated by using a 

Frantz isodynamic magnetic separator. This set of procedures resulted in a high-density, paramagnetic mineral 

concentrate for spectrographic analysis. 

The procedure used for magnetic separation was 

somewhat unconventional. The magnet of the Frantz isodynamic separator was positioned horizontally and covered 

with a sheet of thin mylar. A sample was placed on a 

paper-covered tray, then raised up to the mylar-covered 

magnet, which was set at 0.3 A; this procedure effectively 

removed the ferromagnetic fraction of the sample. The 

procedure was repeated with settings at 1.0 and 1.8 A; as a 

result, three groups of fractions, each having a different 

magnetic susceptibility, were created. The 1.8-A fractions 

were analyzed for this study. The horizontal orientation of 

the Frantz isodynamic separator has two distinct advantages 

over the more conventional chute method (where inclined 

tracks pass between the pole pieces of the separator); first, 

cleaning between samples is easier, and so the risk of 

sample contamination is reduced; second, processing the 

samples is much faster. However, the tray method is not as 

precise as the chute method, and the tray method effectively 

reduces the pulling power of the magnet on the sample by as 

much as 50 percent, thus broadening the range of minerals 

found in the processed sample. 

Heavy mineral samples and resultant analytical data 

are highly skewed toward particular mineral phases and 

Table 1. Ranges and median concentrations in ppm for 19 

elements in heavy mineral concentrates from the 

northeastern part of the Greenville 1°X2° quadrangle, 

South Carolina, compared with average values for granite, 

shale, and basalt 

[Lower detection limits in parentheses next to element. N, not detected; L, 

detected but less than the number value shown in the first reporting 

interval; -, data are missing or unreliable. All values in parts per million] 

Element __ R_a_n_ge __ Median Aver~ge Avera~e Average 

Low High gran1te1 shale basale 

Barium (50) 

Beryllium (2) 

Bismuth (20) 

N 

N 

N 

Boron (20) N 

Chromium (20) N 

1,500 

500 

500 

5,000 

700 

Cobalt (10) 50 

Copper (10) 

Gold (20) 

Lanthanum (50) 

Lead (20) 

Nickel (10) 

Niobium (50) 

Scandium (10) 

Silver (1) 

Thorium (200) 

Tin (20) 

Vanadium (20) 

Yttrium (20) 

Zinc (500) 

N 

N 3,000 

N 1,000 

N >2,000 

N 50,000 

N 700 

N 

N 

N 

2,000 

>200 

20 

N >5,000 

N >2,000 

1,000 

N >5,000 

5,000 

L 

N 

N 4840 

2 5 

N .01 

20 4 10 

100 15 

N 3 

N 15 

N .004 

300 4

55 

20 20 

15 7 

150 20 

70 47 

N .04 

N 17.5 

50 3 

150 42 

500 441 

N 439 

1

Guilbert and Park, 1985. 2

Average shale of Turekian, 1977. 3 Average basalt of Turek ian, 1977. 

580 330 

3 

100 5 

90 170 

19 48 

45 87 

.005 .002 

39 17 

20 6 

68 130 

11 19 

13 30 

.07 .11 

12 2.7 

6 1.5 

130 250 

35 25 

95 105 

4

Average low-calcium granite of Turekian, 1977. 

element associations. The accumulation of detrital minerals 

from fluvial sediments in small stream channels will vary as 

a complex function of many factors, including source 

material, stream regimen, position of the sampling site with 

respect to longitudinal distance from a stream's headwaters 

and transverse distance from the center of the present 

channel, and the size of the drainage basin containing a 

given stream. Overstreet and others (1968) and Mertie 

(1979) give thoughtful discussions concerning the natural 

factors affecting the tenor of different materials in a panned 

concentrate. Subsequent laboratory processing further modifies these patterns and results in enhanced abundances of 

certain minerals and elements and diminished abundances 

of others. Even the reproducibility of analytical results for 

replicate samples at a given site is limited. 

ANALYTICAL METHODS 

All of the samples were analyzed for 31 elements by 

using a six-step, semiquantitative emission spectrographic 

method (Grimes and Marranzino, 1968; Matooka and 

Grimes, 1976). These results are summarized in table 1 of 

Analytical Methods 7 
this report and are available in their entirety in Jackson and 

Adrian (1991). A small split ofunground sample was saved 

for mineral grain identification; however, no systematic 

attempt was made to determine the abundances of minerals 

in the splits of the analyzed concentrates. Distribution of the 

abundance of 15 selected minerals in the samples is given 

by Overstreet and others ( 1968, pls. 1-4). 

DISCUSSION 

The data permit some generalizations regarding geologic and lithotectonic controls, and they draw attention to 

parts of the study area that contain anomalous concentrations of certain elements. We present the geochemical 

attributes of the analytical data in frequency distribution 

histograms (fig. 5) and in single-element or multipleelement distribution maps (figs. 6-28). For most elements, 

the values representing the high end of the sample population, which include high background values as well as 

anomalous values, were plotted on the distribution maps. 

Reporting intervals representing high background values 

were included on the distribution maps to avoid unduly 

emphasizing values not truly anomalous. 

Using a single set of statistical parameters to define 

anomalous values was precluded because the heavy mineral 

concentrates reflect a wide range of rock types representing 

various geochemical terranes and because a relatively large 

number of elements were plotted for each sample. Instead, 

threshold limits for data intervals used on the element 

distribution maps were determined by visual inspection of 

the histograms for anomalous data. The average abundances 

of selected elements in granite, basalt, and shale (table 1) 

generally were considered as background values for unmineralized materials and were compared to our data as an 

additional aid in identifying anomalous values. Median 

concentration intervals are indicated on the frequency distribution histograms by arrows, and the intervals used in 

plotting distribution maps are bracketed. 

Although the geochemical data for heavy mineral 

concentrates are not representative of the composite chemistry of rock units in a particular drainage basin, our 

reconnaissance data show median concentrations for most 

elements that differ by a factor of only 4 or less from 

concentrations in the average granite or shale, despite field 

and laboratory concentration factors of several thousand 

(table 1). Further, some of the observed variability is 

probably due to the relatively large analytical uncertainty 

associated with the spectographic method; this uncertainty 

is ± 1 reporting interval 83 percent of the time (Matooka 

and Grimes, 1976). Median values having a greater than 

fourfold enrichment compared to the average granite or 

shale values shown in table 1 are noted only for the 

elements La (sixfold), Nb (tenfold), Sc (sevenfold), Sn 

(elevenfold), and Y (thirteenfold). 

For certain elements, most notably lanthanum, scandium, and vanadium, most samples fall in the higher 

reporting intervals, and generalizations regarding geologic 

controls or areal distribution may be unwarranted. Other 

elements, including gold, silver, and bismuth, were 

detected in so few samples that generalizations are, likewise, unwarranted. Selected elements of economic interest 

are plotted with geochemically associated elements (figs. 8, 

12, and 24) to help characterize any associations within the 

study area that may indicate a mineralized zone. Concentrations of other elements, such as zirconium and titanium, 

exceeded the upper detection limit for the six-step semiquantitative method in many samples, and they are not 

considered separately in our discussion. The high zirconium 

and titanium values indicate the persistence of zircon and 

the titanium minerals ilmenite and rutile across the entire 

study area. 

DISTRIBUTION OF SELECTED ELEMENTS 

Barium 

Barium was not detected in the vast majority of 

samples. Only one sample contains more than the 580-840 

ppm barium found in the average shale or granite (table 1), 

and the six remaining samples showing values more than 

150 ppm are widely scattered (fig. 6). Samples having 

concentrations in the 100-ppm to 150-ppm range are clustered in the north-central and southwestern parts of the 

study area, many of them in or along the edge of areas 

containing granitic rocks delineated within the Six Mile 

thrust sheet by Nelson and others (1987). Alkali feldspar, 

which is the likely host mineral for barium in most rocks, 

was largely removed from the samples before analysis; its 

removal probably accounts for the generally low abundance 

of barium in the concentrates. Thus, the occurrences of 

barium reported in this study may be due to a less common 

mineral such as barite (BaS04 ), and the scattered higher 

concentrations, as well as the obvious clustering of samples 

having concentrations less than 200 ppm, may have intrinsic assessment· significance. 

Barite associated with gold has been reported at 

localities in the nearby Kings Mountain belt and Carolina 

slate belt (Bell and others, 1980; Butler, 1981). Two of the 

samples from our study area that contained detectable gold 

and barium come from the Six Mile thrust sheet. One 

sample contained 20 ppm gold and 300 ppm barium; the 

other contained 70 ppm gold and 100 ppm barium. 

Beryllium 

Concentrations of beryllium above the 30-ppm 

reporting interval are found mostly in samples from the 

8 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1 ox 2° Quadrangle, South Carolina 
northern part of the Paris Mountain thrust sheet (fig. 7). The 

highest concentrations are reported from samples clustered 

immediately west of Paris Mountain. This zone of high 

beryllium concentrations may extend farther north or west, 

beyond our sampling area. 

The elevated beryllium values are substantially higher 

than would be expected in the average granite or shale, 

although the median beryllium content for our sample set is 

not appreciably different (table 1). Thus, the high beryllium 

values near Paris Mountain probably are not due to common 

rock-forming minerals, but to the presence of a berylliumbearing mineral. The mineral beryl, which has a specific 

gravity of only 2.65-2.80, should have been removed 

during the processing of the samples through bromoform 

(specific gravity=2.85). Griffitts, Duttweiler, and others 

(1985, p. 3) speculated that chrysoberyl (specific gravity= 

3.75) may account for high beryllium contents of heavy 

mineral concentrates from the Inner Piedmont and thus may 

explain the high beryllium contents of samples from this 

study. 

The beryllium distribution pattern is very similar to 

the pattern shown by certain other lithophile elements (fig. 

8), particularly tin (see Tin section). A number of pegmatites in which minor amounts of beryl occur are found in the 

southwestern part of the study area (fig. 4), but these do not 

fall within the region of elevated beryllium values shown in 

this report. 

Bismuth 

Bismuth, which was detected in only seven samples 

(fig. 9), is a common accessory element in many precious 

and base metal deposits (Rose and others, 1979, p. 106). 

Although bismuth is associated with tin in areas of the Inner 

Piedmont and in the tin-spodumene belt to the northeast in 

the Charlotte 1 ox 2° quadrangle (Griffitts, Whitlow, and 

others, 1985a), it showed no obvious association with tin in 

this study. The elevated values encountered here may be 

due to manmade contaminants, such as lead shot, which 

was present in some samples. 

Boron 

Sites having concentrations of boron 100 ppm or 

greater generally are confined to the Paris Mountain thrust 

sheet and the adjoining granitic rocks to the east; the highest 

values are found in the northeastern part of the study area 

(fig. 10). Tourmaline was noted in some of the heavy 

mineral concentrates and may be the source of the boron. 

Pegmatitic tourmaline-bearing lenses and dikes are common 

to the area and are the probable source of the tourmaline in 

the samples. 

The distribution pattern of boron is similar to that of 

certain other lithophile elements, most notably beryllium 

(figs. 7, 8), which is associated commonly with boron in 

pegmatites (Rose and others, 1979, p. 553). 

Chromium 

Sites having the highest concentrations of chromium 

are located mostly to the west of the Paris Mountain thrust 

sheet (fig. 11). Overall, the distribution of chromium shows 

some similarity to the distribution of the geochemically 

associated element nickel, as shown in figure 12 (see Nickel 

section). 

Cobalt 

Cobalt was detected in relatively low concentrations 

in a number of samples from across the study area (fig. 13). 

None of these values significantly exceed the value for an 

average basalt (table 1), and some of the higher values may 

be related to mafic rocks in the drainage basins of those 

samples. Griffitts, Whitlow, Siems, and others (1984) 

reported that, in the nearby Charlotte 1° x 2° quadrangle, 

cobalt was associated commonly with gold, and they 

speculated that both elements were involved in common 

episodes of mineralization. However, no similar correlations were found within the study area. 

Copper 

The relatively even distribution of samples containing 

concentrations of copper greater than 30 ppm over the study 

area indicates no apparent lithologic or structural control of 

these values (fig. 14). Overall, there are few associations 

evident between higher copper values and higher values for 

any other chalcophile elements. One sample from near the 

southeastern border of the study area containing 1 ,000 ppm 

copper and 2,000 ppm zinc is located approximately 5.5 mi 

northeast of a known massive sulfide occurrence, the 

Saluda copper prospect (fig. 4). Upon visual examination 

with a binocular microscope of splits of the heavy mineral 

concentrates from sample sites reporting greater than 300 

ppm copper, no copper minerals or sulfides were noted. 

However, traces of lead shot were found in some samples, 

and copper commonly is used as plating on lead shot. 

Therefore, some of the elevated copper values may not be 

indicative of copper mineralization but may be due to 

manmade contaminants (see also Lead section). 

Gold 

Gold was detected in 11 samples from widely scattered locations (fig. 15). All but one of the sites are in rocks 

structurally below the Paris Mountain thrust sheet, but there 

is no obvious lithologic or structural control to the distriDistribution of Selected Elements 9 
(I) 

~ a... 

:::2: 

<t: 

(I) 

u.. 

Cl 

cr:. 

UJ 

co 

:::2: 

::> 

z 

(I) 

~ a... 

:::2: 

<t: 

(I) 

u.. 

Cl 

cr:. 

UJ 

co 

:::2: 

::> 

z 

(I) 

UJ 

--' a... 

:::2: 

<t: 

«O~ 400 

100 

Barium 

420U 

380 ' 

100 

Copper 

200 

~ 100 Cl 

cr:. 

UJ 

co 

:::2: 

::> 

z 

(I) 

~ a... 

:::2: 

<t: 

200 

~ 100 Cl 

cr:. 

UJ 

co 

:::2: 

::> 

z 

Niobium 

280b 

240 

(I) 

~ a... 

:::2: 

<t: 

~ 100 Cl 

cr:. 

UJ 

co 

:::2: 

::> 

z 

Beryllium 

620~ 

580 

(I) 

~ a... 

:::2: 

<t: 

~ 100 Cl 

cr:. 

UJ 

co 

:::2: 

::> 

z 

(I) 

~ a... 

:::2: 

<t: 

200 

~ 100 Cl 

cr:. 

UJ 

co 

:::2: 

::> 

z 

Gold 

Scandium 

::~ ~ 1J a... 

:::2: 

~ 100 u.. 

Cl 

ffi 

co 

:::2: 

::> 

z 

Zinc 

10 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1°X2° Quadrangle, South Carolina 

(I) 

UJ 

--' a... 

:::2: 

<t: 

(I) 

u.. 

Cl 

cr:. 

UJ 

co 

:::2: 

::> 

z 

(I) 

~ a... 

:::2: 

<t: 

(I) 

u.. 

Cl 

cr:. 

UJ 

co 

:::2: 

::> 

z 

(I) 

~ a... 

:::2: 

<t: 

620~ 

580 " 

100 

Bismuth 

200 

100 

Lanthanum 

620~: 

580 . 

~ 100 Cl 

cr:. 

UJ 

co 

:::2: 

::> 

z 

Silver 
C/') 

~ a.. 

~ 

<t: 

C/') 

u... 

a 

a: 

L.I.J 

co 

~ 

:::l 

z 

~ a.. 

~ 

<t: 

200 

100 

200 

~ 100 a 

a: 

L.I.J 

co 

~ 

:::l 

z 

l 

0

-230 

Boron 

Lead 

3~~ 

320 

C/') 

~ a.. 

~ 

<t: 

~ 100 a 

a: 

L.I.J 

co 

~ 

:::l 

z 

Thorium 

200 

C/') 

~ a.. 

~ 

<t: 

~ 100 a 

a: 

L.I.J 

co 

~ 

:::l 

z 

Chromium 

200 

C/') 

~ a.. 

~ 

<t: 

~ 100 a 

a: 

L.I.J 

co 

~ 

:::l 

z 

Figure 5. Histograms showing frequency distribution in 

parts per million for 19 selected elements in panned 

concentrate samples from the study area. N, not detected; 

L, detected but less than the number value shown in first 

bution pattern of gold. In five of these samples, detectable 

gold and silver are reported, and in two samples gold and 

barium are reported (see Barium section). The only other 

noted association is the presence of 2,000 ppm copper and 

200 ppm gold in one sample from the western edge of the 

sampling area. 

560n 

520 

C/') 

,----, ~ a.. 

~ 

<t: 

~ 100 a 

a: 

L.I.J 

co 

~ 

:::l 

z 

Cobalt 

Nickel 

200 

C/') 

L.I.J 

_J 

a.. 

~ 

<t: 

~ 100 a 

a: 

L.I.J 

co 

~ 

:::l 

z 

Vanadium 

reporting interval. Vertical arrows denote median reporting interval; horizontal brackets indicate range of intervals 

used in element distribution maps (figs. 6-28). 

Particulate gold was identified from splits of the 

heavy mineral concentrates in all but one of the samples 

containing 20 ppm or more gold by using a binocular 

microscope. Because of the scattered distribution and the 

lack of obvious elemental associations, no effort was made 

to systematically identify either deposit type or source 

Distribution of Selected Elements 11 
20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage A 1,500 ppm 

~ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; • 500 ppm 

dashed where inferred; queried • 300 ppm where questionable 

D 200 ppm 

Intrusive contact 6 100-150 ppm 

Figure 6. Distribution of barium in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

material for the precious metals encountered in the study 

area. 

Lanthanum 

Lanthanum contents of the heavy mineral concentrates are consistently skewed toward higher values (fig. 5). 

Median contents are about six times that of the average 

granite or shale (table 1). The lanthanum-bearing heavy 

mineral monazite was found in all of the samples reporting 

more than 2,000 ppm lanthanum. Given that these samples 

were collected in the monazite belt of Mertie (1975), the 

presence of monazite in many of the streams of the study 

area was expected. However, its presence was not expected 

in the paramagnetic fractions of the samples that were 

analyzed spectrographically, because monazite is generally 

magnetic at the amperage these samples were subjected to 

and should have been removed during sample preparation. 

Obviously the magnetic separation methods used for this 

study incompletely removed monazite from most of those 

12 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1 °X r Quadrangle, South Carolina 
20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage 

............_ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; 

dashed where inferred; queried 

where questionable 

J& 300-500 ppm 

e 200 ppm 

+ 100-150 ppm 

D 50-70 ppm 

6 20-30 ppm 

Intrusive contact 

Figure 7. Distribution of beryllium in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

samples that contained the highest percentages of monazite, 

possibly due in part to monazite's variable magnetic susceptibility. 

Lanthanum is most abundant in samples from the 

northeastern half of the study area (fig. 16). Visual inspection of the magnetic fractions of the concentrates from the 

southwestern half of the study area, which have low 

lanthanum values, revealed that many of these samples also 

contain monazite, although in lesser amounts than samples 

from the northeastern half of the area. A comparison of the 

lanthanum values greater than 2,000 ppm from this study to 

contours drawn by Overstreet (1968, pl. 3) for samples that 

contain more than 10 percent monazite (from visual inspection) is shown in figure 17. Although a number of the 

samples that contain high lanthanum values fall outside of 

these contours, overall the two data sets correlate closely; 

this relation suggests that monazite is the source of the 

elevated lanthanum values. All but one of the monazite 

occurrences shown on figure 4 also are located in the 

northeastern half of the study area. 

Mertie (1979, p. 2, 37) described the distribution of 

monazite as variably present in many types of granitic rocks 

Distribution of Selected Elements 13 
20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

CJ Area of sample coverage 

.....___._ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; 

dashed where inferred; queried 

where questionable 

_6. 1,000-5,000 ppm boron 

+ 200-500 ppm beryllium 

D >2,000 ppm tin 

Intrusive contact 

Figure 8. Multiple-element distribution map of the study area for boron, beryllium, and tin. See figure 3 for names and 

locations of tectonic features. 

from within the belt and concluded that in South Carolina 

granitic gneisses are more important sources of monazite 

than are massive granitic rocks. Overstreet and others 

(1968, p. 24) reported that sillimanite schists are more 

important as source rocks contributing monazite to stream 

placers than are biotite schists and biotite gneisses. Overstreet and others (1968, p. 24) observed wide variations in 

the amount of monazite within similar rock types, as well as 

wide overlaps in the range of monazite present within 

different rock types. The high lanthanum values from the 

present study are widely distributed and cross major geologic boundaries. These characteristics indicate that monazite is a pervasive constituent of stream placers probably 

derived from different rock types throughout the study area. 

Another possible source for lanthanum in the samples is the 

mineral zircon (ZrSi04 ), which may contain small amounts 

of light rare earth elements and is found throughout the 

study area. 

14 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1°X2° Quadrangle, South Carolina 
I 

20 MILES 

I 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage • 500 ppm 

........___._ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; • 70 ppm 

dashed where inferred; queried • 50 ppm 

where questionable 0 30 ppm 

Intrusive contact [':, 20 ppm 

Figure 9. Distribution of bismuth in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features . 

Lead 

The distribution of lead in the study area is random 

(fig. 18). The median content of 20 ppm is the same as 

would be expected in the average granite or shale. The most 

likely lead-bearing mineral in the raw stream sediment is 

alkali feldspar; however, virtually all feldspar was removed 

during sample preparation. Although values for some samples greatly exceeded the median content, lead shot was 

detected in splits of several of these samples. Bismuth, a 

common alloying element in lead shot, is anomalous in 

several of these samples. 

Nickel 

All sample sites having concentrations of nickel 

greater than 100 ppm are found in rocks structurally below 

the Paris Mountain thrust sheet (fig. 19). Many of the 

higher values to the west of the thrust sheet are paired with 

elevated chromium values (see fig. 12). However, the 

Distribution of Selected Elements 15 
20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage 

..A...-.t... Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; 

dashed where inferred; queried 

e 1,000 ppm 

+ 700 ppm 

0 500 ppm 

where questionable 6 300 ppm 

Intrusive contact 

A 5,000 ppm 

0 100-200 ppm 

Figure 10. Distribution of boron in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

concentrations for these geochemically associated elements 

fall well within the expected range for the average basalt 

(table 1) and probably are related to nearby mafic bodies, 

such as the Anderson metagabbro in the Six Mile thrust 

sheet or smaller unmapped mafic or ultramafic units in the 

other thrust sheets. 

Niobium 

Many of the heavy mineral concentrates from the 

Paris Mountain thrust sheet and immediately to the east of 

it contain elevated niobium values (fig. 20). Most notable, 

however, is a pronounced clustering of high values from the 

16 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1 ox 2° Quadrangle, South Carolina 
I 

20 KILOMETERS 

20 MILES 

I 

EXPLANATION 

CJ Area of sample coverage • 700 ppm 

.............._ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; 

dashed where inferred; queried 

where questionable 

• 500 ppm 

0 300 ppm 

Intrusive contact 

Figure 11. Distribution of chromium in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

Reedy River and Saluda River drainages, in rocks along the 

edge of and adjoining the Paris Mountain thrust sheet. This 

cluster is a localized feature in the terrane of granitic rocks 

delineated by Nelson and others ( 1987) and may represent a 

specialized pluton or pegmatitic lenses containing either a 

niobium mineral such as columbite or minerals such as 

ilmenite, sphene, or rutile incorporating niobium as an 

accessory component. Rutile grains in several of the concentrates from this area were analyzed qualitatively by energydispersive X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy and were found 

to contain both niobium and tantalum. Fleischer and others 

(1952) showed that rutile having high niobium content is 

generally found in granitic pegmatites and alkalic rocks. 

Rutile, possibly as ilmenorutile, a phase containing iron in 

the form of ferrous niobate and tantalate, is a likely source 

of the elevated niobium values in the samples of this study. 

Scandium 

Scandium was detected in most samples, and the 

enrichment of scandium in the concentrates relative to the 

Distribution of Selected Elements 17 
20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage 

............._ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; 

dashed where inferred; queried 

where questionable 

D 500-700 ppm chromium 

.A 150-700 ppm nickel 

+ 30-50 ppm cobalt 

Intrusive contact 

Figure 12. Multiple-element distribution map of the study area for chromium, nickel, and cobalt. See figure 3 for names 

and locations of tectonic features. 

average granite or shale is about six times, but only about 

twice that of the average basalt (table 1). The overall 

variability around the median of 70 ppm (fig. 5) approaches 

that of normal distribution and indicates that the highest 

values may reflect little more than analytical uncertainty. 

Nevertheless, the distribution map for scandium shows a 

clustering of the highest values near Paris Mountain and in 

the east-central part of the study area, where yttrium and 

scandium appear to be associated (fig. 21). Scandium does 

not always accompany the lanthanide rare earth elements in 

minerals due to its smaller ionic radius; however, scandium 

has a close chemical relationship with yttrium and can occur 

as an accessory component in monazite (Rankama and 

Sahama, 1950, p. 508-517). 

Silver 

Silver was detected spectrographically in 10 samples, 

5 of which also have detectable gold (see Gold section). 

These samples are widely scattered throughout the study 

area and show no obvious lithologic or structural control to 

their distribution pattern (fig. 22). 

18 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1 °X r Quadrangle, South Carolina 
I 

20 KILOMETERS 

20 MILES 

I 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage • 50 ppm 

............... Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; • 30 ppm 

dashed where inferred; queried • 20 ppm where questionable 

Intrusive contact D 15 ppm 

6 10 ppm 

Figure 13. Distribution of cobalt in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

Anomalous lead values as much as 5,000 ppm are 

associated with three samples containing anomalous silver, 

but because these lead values may be related to manamde 

contaminants (see Lead section), the significance of this 

geochemically important association is suspect. 

Thorium 

Thorium values, like the lanthanum values discussed 

earlier, appear to show a preferential enrichment in samples 

taken from the northeastern part of the study area (fig. 23). 

We determined that the high lanthanum values probably 

reflect, at least in part, a sample preparation bias in which 

monazite was incompletely removed from some samples 

(see Lanthanum section). Although this same sample 

preparation bias may account for the overall pervasiveness 

of the higher thorium values in the northeastern part of the 

study area, these samples do reveal a secondary clustering 

of anomalously high thorium values near the eastern edge of 

the study area, and the elevated values appear to be 

associated with yttrium (fig. 24). 

Distribution of Selected Elements 19 
+C6o o 

20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage • 1 ,000-1,500 ppm 

............... Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; • 300-500 ppm 

dashed where inferred; queried D 150-200 ppm where questionable 

Intrusive contact 6 70-100 ppm 

• 2,000-3,000 ppm 0 30-50 ppm 

Figure 14. Distribution of copper in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

The content of Th02 in monazite is highly variable 

(Mertie, 1979, p. 21). The high thorium values near the 

eastern edge of the study area suggest that the monazite 

from there may have a higher Th02 content relative to 

monazite from elsewhere in the study area. Most of the high 

thorium values occur in or near the edge of an area of biotite 

gneiss delineated by Nelson and others ( 1987) that in places 

grades to a sillimanite schist. 

Tin 

Tin is by far the most abundant of the ore metals 

encountered in this study and has a median value of 50 ppm, 

which represents an elevenfold enrichment relative to the 

average granite or shale. Tin is present in amounts greater 

than 1,000 ppm in 15 samples. The presence of elevated tin 

values throughout the study area suggests a tin-anomalous 

20 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1 °X 2° Quadrangle, South Carolina 
20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage • 1,000 ppm 

............... Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; • 200 ppm 

dashed where inferred; queried • 100 ppm where questionable 

Intrusive contact D 50-70 ppm 

~ 20-30 ppm 

Figure 15. Distribution of gold in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

region (fig. 25). A number of the samples containing the 

highest amounts of tin were examined by both X-ray 

diffraction and scanning electron microscope. Cassiterite in 

the 200- to 500-J..Lm range was positively identified in each 

of these samples. 

The frequency distribution histogram for tin (fig. 5) 

reveals two (and possibly three) populations: (1) samples 

having tin values below the lower detection limit of 20 ppm 

(not detected (N) or detected but less than the first reported 

value (L)), (2) samples having values above the upper 

detection limit of 2,000 ppm, and (3) a distinctly Gaussian 

population between these two extremes having a median at 

100 ppm. The values above detection may simply represent 

the upper end of the intermediate Gaussian population. 

Samples having tin values in the N or L reporting 

intervals are restricted almost entirely to the Six Mile thrust 

sheet ( 195 of 209 sample locations), whereas samples 

having values in the 70 to 150 ppm range (the median 

interval of population 3 and the two adjacent intervals) 

occur predominantly in the Paris Mountain and Laurens 

Distribution of Selected Elements 21 
20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage >2,000 ppm 

.............._ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; • 2,000 ppm 

dashed where inferred; queried 

where questionable 

Intrusive contact 

Figure 16. Distribution of lanthanum in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

thrust sheets (117 of 156 sample locations). These relations 

suggest that the distribution of tin values within the study 

area may be lithotectonically controlled and that each 

population may favor a certain terrane. 

The most anomalous of the three groupings, those 

samples having values above detection (population 2), 

cluster near Paris Mountain and in a belt extending southeast from Simpsonville, S.C. These samples are widespread 

and commonly are found near sample sites having much 

lower tin values; these characteristics suggest that the 

anomalous values probably represent localized mineralized 

pods or lenses in the schists, gneisses, or granites. 

Gair and Horton (1989) reported that tin anomalies in 

the nearby Inner Piedmont of North Carolina are generally 

indicative of individual mineralized zones, the most important of which are greissens of the tin-spodumene belt. The 

greissens are generally less than 1 m thick and no more than 

15 m long. Thin ( <0.6 m) tin-bearing leucosomes are 

present in the Goodes Creek unit of the Inner Piedmont, 

located west of the tin-spodumene belt near Shelby, N.C., 

22 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1°xr Quadrangle, South Carolina 
20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage Intrusive contact 

Contours of Overstreet (1968), 

10-30 percent monazite 

Lanthanum > 2,000 ppm 

..........._._ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; 

dashed where inferred; queried 

where questionable 

Figure 17. Distribution of lanthanum >2,000 ppm and monazite contours of Overstreet (1968). See figure 3 for names and 

locations of tectonic features. 

but most leucosomes of that unit are geochemically barren 

of tin (Rowe, 1987). Rowe (1987) reported that these 

tin-bearing leucosomes occur within gneisses of the Goodes 

Creek unit that have slightly anomalous tin values, although 

the anomalous tin values are not evenly distributed within 

the gneisses. The spotty, uneven distribution of samples 

having elevated tin values from our study area may reflect 

the uneven distribution of tin-enriched rocks. We did not 

determine whether the elevated tin values represent 

cassiterite-bearing leucosomes or anomalous tin-bearing 

schists, gneisses, and (or) granites. 

The possibility of cassiterite-bearing leucosomes in 

the study area appears to be highest near Paris Mountain, 

where the tin values are associated with elevated beryllium 

values (fig. 8). A tin-beryllium association has been 

documented in the Inner Piedmont by Theobald and others 

Distribution of Selected Elements 23 
20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage ~ 20,000-50,000 ppm 

~ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; • 5,000-10,000 ppm 

dashed where inferred; queried • 1,500-3,000 ppm where questionable 

Intrusive contact 

0 500-1,000 ppm 

6 150-300 ppm 

Figure 18. Distribution of lead in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

(1967) in their magnetite study, as well as by Griffitts 

(1954); Griffitts, Whitlow, Duttweiler, and others (1984); 

Griffitts, Duttweiler, and others (1985); and Gair (1986). 

Vanadium 

Vanadium was detected spectrographically in every 

sample. Higher concentrations of vanadium are rather 

evenly distributed across a northeast-southwest-trending 

belt that cuts through much of the study area (fig. 26). An 

apparent eastern limit to the higher values coincides roughly 

with the boundary between the Paris Mountain thrust sheet 

and granitic rocks to the east. The data suggest that 

vanadium is enriched in the predominantly schistose rocks 

of the Six Mile and Paris Mountain thrust sheets relative to 

the granitic rocks to the east. Because no vanadium minerals were noted upon inspection of the concentrates, the 

apparent lithologic control of vanadium likely occurs as a 

result of the enrichment of a mineral hosting vanadium, 

possibly a titanium-bearing mineral phase. 

24 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1 ox 2° Quadrangle, South Carolina 
20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

CJ Area of sample coverage • 300 ppm 

............... Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; 

dashed where inferred; queried 

where questionable 

+ 150-200 ppm 

D 100 ppm 

6 50-70 ppm 

0 30 ppm 

Intrusive contact 

£. 700 ppm 

Figure 19. Distribution of nickel in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

Yttrium 

Yttrium concentrations are moderately high in many 

samples from the study area; the overall sample population 

has a median concentration interval of 500 ppm (table 1). 

The thirteenfold enrichment relative to the average granite 

or shale of these yttrium concentrations indicates the likely 

presence of one or more rare-earth-bearing minerals within 

the study area. The distribution of yttrium may be related, 

in part, to the abundance of monazite in many samples. 

Yttrium concentrations are elevated in samples clustered near the eastern boundary of the study area (fig. 27). 

These anomalous yttrium values are associated with 

elevated thorium values (fig. 24) and high scandium values 

(see Scandium section), both of which also may be attributed to the presence of monazite in the concentrates. 

Xenotime, a mineral commonly associated with monazite in 

the North and South Carolina Piedmont (Overstreet and 

others, 1968), is a likely source for additional yttrium in the 

samples, as is zircon, which was abundant in most samples. 

Distribution of Selected Elements 25 
20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage • 2,000 ppm 

............... Thrust fau lt-Teeth on upper plate; • 1,000-1,500 ppm 

dashed where inferred; queried • 700 ppm where questionable 

Intrusive contact D 500 ppm 

Figure 20. Distribution of niobium in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

Zinc 

Zinc was detected in only nine widely scattered 

samples and thus shows no obvious pattern in its 

distribution (fig. 28). Only two of the samples appear to be 

associated with elevated values for other elements. One 

sample having 2,000 ppm zinc, from the southeastern part 

of the study area, contains anomalous copper and tin, and 

one sample having 5,000 ppm zinc was collected near sites 

containing anomalous, tin near Paris Mountain. 

In the Inner Piedmont of North Carolina, in the 

nearby Charlotte 1 ox 2° quadrangle, zincian spinel is relatively widespread, and zincian staurolite also occurs there, 

although not as commonly (Griffitts, Whitlow, ~nd others, 

1985b). Either of these two zinc-rich minerals, or sphalerite, may be responsible for the zinc values reported within 

our study area. 

CONCLUSIONS 

The geochemistry of the heavy mineral concentrates 

reveals anomalous abundances of tin, beryllium, barium, 

26 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1o x r Quadrangle, South Carolina 
I 

20 KILOMETERS 

20 MILES 

I 

EXPLANATION 

CJ Area of sample coverage • >200 ppm 

......___._ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; 

dashed where inferred; queried 

where questionable 

• 200 ppm 

Intrusive contact 

Figure 21. Distribution of scandium in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

thorium, and the rare earth elements lanthanum and yttrium 

within the study area, but direct source rocks have not been 

identified. Generalizations relating the geochemical data to 

the geologic and lithotectonic framework of Nelson and 

others ( 1987, 1989) do little to identify or favorably predict 

zones that may be linked to mineral resource occurrences. 

However, the spatial distribution of values reported for 

certain elements, including tin, niobium, and vanadium, do 

conform generally with the thrust sheet boundaries and 

seem to affirm the viability of the sheets as geochemically 

distinct units. 

The distribution of tin suggests that, overall, tin 

mineralization was a more widespread process in the 

metamorphically younger Laurens and Paris Mountain 

thrust sheets than in the older Six Mile thrust sheet. Thus, 

the younger thrust sheets appear to be the more favorable 

terrane for tin resource potential. Many of the tin values for 

the study area are anomalously high and appear to reflect a 

tendency shown by certain other lithophile elements, most 

notably beryllium and boron, to be higher in the northeastem part of the study area. Areas near Paris Mountain, S.C. , 

and around Simpsonville, S.C., show a clustering of high 

Conclusions 27 
0 

I I 

20 KILOMETERS 

20 MILES 

I 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage • 20 ppm 

~ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; • 15 ppm 

dashed where inferred; queried • 5 ppm where questionable 

Intrusive contact D 2 ppm 

Figure 22. Distribution of silver in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

tin values, and cassiterite was identified in samples from 

those areas; its presence suggests that a more detailed 

investigation may be justified there. 

The barium values reported in this study may warrant 

a more detailed study, especially where associated with 

gold. These barium values may reflect the presence of 

barite. 

The rare-earth-bearing mineral monazite is found 

throughout the study area, and its presence is reflected by 

high lanthanum values in many samples. The association of 

anomalous concentrations of lanthanum, yttrium, and scandium, as well as elevated thorium values, near the eastern 

edge of the study area suggests that additional rare-earthbearing minerals may be present there, possibly hosting rare 

earth elements not analyzed for in this study. 

The scattered distribution patterns and apparent lack 

of lithotectonic controls for certain base metals, including 

nickel, copper, zinc, and lead, effectively limit the assessment significance of the isolated anomalies reported for 

these elements. Low level traces of gold and silver are not 

28 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1°X2° Quadrangle, South Carolina 
82°00' 

20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage • 2,000-3,000 ppm 

............... Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; • 1,500 ppm 

dashed where inferred; queried D 1,000 ppm where questionable 

Intrusive contact !'::, 700 ppm 

.. >5,000 ppm 0 500 ppm 

Figure 23. Distribution of thorium in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

uncommon in the North and South Carolina Piedmont; 

thus, the few scattered values reported here probably do not 

m themselves justify additional study for the precious 

metals. 

Conclusions 29 
20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage 

......__._ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; 

dashed where inferred; queried 

where questionable 

Intrusive contact 

6 >2,000 ppm thorium 

D >2,000 ppm yttrium 

Figure 24. Multiple-element distribution map of the study area for thorium and yttrium. See figure 3 for names and 

locations of tectonic features. 

30 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1oxr Quadrangle, South Carolina 
I 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage 

...&.......&.. Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; • 

dashed where inferred; queried • 

where questionable 

Intrusive contact 0 

6 

20 MILES 

I 

>2,000 ppm 

1 ,500-2,000 ppm 

1,000 ppm 

500-700 ppm 

200-300 ppm 

Figure 25. Distribution of tin in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

Conclusions 31 
• 

20 MILES 

20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

CJ Area of sample coverage .. 700-1,000 ppm 

.............._ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; • 500 ppm 

dashed where inferred; queried 

where questionable 

Intrusive contact 

Figure 26. Distribution of vanadium in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

32 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1 °X 2° Quadrangle, South Carolina 
20 MILES 

0 20 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage 

........._._ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; 

dashed where inferred; queried 

where questionable 

Intrusive contact 

... ;:::5,000 ppm 

• 2,000-3,000 ppm 

+ 1,500 ppm 

Figure 27. Distribution of yttrium in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

Conclusions 33 
0 

I 

20 KILOMETERS 

20 MILES 

I 

EXPLANATION 

D Area of sample coverage ~ 5,000 ppm 

~ Thrust fault-Teeth on upper plate; • 2,000 ppm 

dashed where inferred; queried • 1,000-1,500 ppm where questionable 

Intrusive contact D 500 ppm 

Figure 28. Distribution of zinc in the study area. See figure 3 for names and locations of tectonic features. 

REFERENCES CITED 

Bell, H.B., III, Carpenter, R.H., and Feiss, P.G., 1980, Volcanogenic ore deposits of the Carolina slate belt: Geological 

Society of America, Field Trip no. 8, p. 149-178. 

Butler, J.R., 1981, Gold and related deposits of the Smyrna 

district, York and Cherokee Counties, South Carolina: South 

Carolina Geology, v. 25, no. 1, p. 9-20. 

Caldwell, D.W., 1962, Description, composition, and tenor of 

unconsolidated sediments in monazite-bearing tributaries to 

the Savannah and Saluda Rivers in the western Piedmont of 

South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

62-24, 19 p. 

Caldwell, D.W., and White, A.M., 1973, Fluvial monazite 

deposits in the drainage basins of the Savannah and Saluda 

Rivers, South Carolina: South Carolina State Development 

Board, Division of Geology, Columbia, S.C., Mineral 

Resources Series 2, 75 p. 

Carr, R.S., III, Dean, L.S., Unger, H.E., and Reely, B.T., 1984, 

Stratiform tin mineralization in the Inner Piedmont of North 

and South Carolina: Geological Society of America Abstract 

with Programs, v. 16, no. 6, p. 464. 

34 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1oxr Quadrangle, South Carolina 
Cuppels, N.P., 1962, Description, composition, and tenor of 

unconsolidated sediments in monazite-bearing tributaries to 

the Enoree, Tyger, and Pacolet Rivers in the western Piedmont of South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 653, 12 p. 

Cuppels, N.P., and White, A.M, 1973, Fluvial monazite deposits 

in the drainage basins of the Enoree, Tyger, and Pacolet 

Rivers, South Carolina: South Carolina State Development 

Board, Division of Geology, Columbia, S.C., Mineral 

Resource Series 1 , 7 4 p. 

D'Agostino, J.P, and Whitlow, J.W., 1985, Cassiterite 

occurrences in the Shelby area, North and South Carolina: 

U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1569, 14 p. 

Fleischer, Michael, Murata, K.J., Fletcher, J.D., and Narten, 

P.F., 1952, Geochemical association of niobium (columbium) and titanium and its geological and economic 

significance: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 225, 13 p. 

Gair, J .E., 1986, Mineral resource potential for tin and tungsten in 

the Charlotte 1 oX 2° quadrangle, North Carolina and South 

Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map 1-1251-I, scale 1:250,000. 

Gair, J.E., and Horton, J.W., Jr., 1989, Cassiterite in tin-bearing 

pegmatites and greisens of the Inner Piedmont belt, in Gair, 

J.E., ed., Mineral resources of the Charlotte 1°X2° quadrangle, North Carolina and South Carolina: U.S. Geological 

Survey Professional Paper 1462, p. 103-106. 

Griffin, V. S., Jr., 197 5, Geology of the Seneca, Westminster, and 

portions of the Avalon and Oakway quadrangles, S.C.: South 

Carolina Division of Geology Map Series MS-20, 42 p. 

Griffitts, W.R., 1954, Beryllium resources of the tin-spodumene 

belt in North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 309, 

12 p. 

Griffitts, W.R., Duttweiler, K.A., Whitlow, J.W., Seims, D.P., 

and Hoffman, J.D., 1985, Distribution of beryllium in 

heavy-mineral concentrate samples from the Charlotte 1 ox 2° 

quadrangle, North Carolina and South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 84-843-G, 5 p. 

Griffitts, W.R., and Olson, J.C., 1953, Mica deposits of the 

southeastern Piedmont: U.S. Geological Survey Professional 

Paper 248-D, p. 203-293. 

Griffitts, W.R., Whitlow, J.W., Duttweiler, K.A., Siems, D.P., 

and Wilch, L.O., 1984, Distribution of tin in heavy-mineral 

concentrate samples from the Charlotte 1° X 2° quadrangle, 

North Carolina and South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 84-843-F, 7 p. 

---1985a, Distribution of antimony, arsenic, bismuth, and 

cadmium in heavy-mineral concentrate samples from the 

Charlotte 1 ox 2° quadrangle, North Carolina and South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 84-843-0, 

4 p. 

---1985b, Distribution of zinc heavy-mineral-concentrate 

from the Charlotte 1°X2° quadrangle, North Carolina and 

South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

84-843-D, 4 p. 

Griffitts, W.R., Whitlow, J.W., Siems, D.P., Duttweiler, K.A., 

and Hoffman, J.D., 1984, Distribution of cobalt in heavymineral concentrate samples from the Charlotte 1 ox 2° quadrangle, North Carolina and South Carolina: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 84-843-L, 4 p. 

Grimes, D.J., and Marranzino, A.P., 1968, Direct-current arc and 

alternating-current spark emission spectrographic field methods for the semiquantitative analysis of geologic materials: 

U.S. Geological Survey Circular 591, 6 p. 

Guilbert, J.M., and Park, C.F., Jr., 1985, The geology of ore 

deposits: New York, W.H. Freeman and Company Press, 

985 p. 

Hatcher, R.D., Jr., 1972, Developmental model for the Southern 

Appalachians: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 83, 

p. 2735-2760. 

---1978, Massive sulfides and other mineral occurrences, in 

Ferguson, R.B., Savannah River Laboratory hydrogeochemical and stream sediment reconnaissance, Greenville 1 oX 2° 

NTMS area, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina: 

Aiken, S.C., Savannah River Laboratory, DuPont, prepared 

for the U.S. Department of Energy under contract no. 

AT(07-2)-1. 

Jackson, J.C., and Adrian, B.M., 1991, Geochemical data for 608 

heavy mineral concentrates from the northeast part of the 

Greenville 1°X2° quadrangle, South Carolina, by semiquantitative emission spectrography: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 91-15, 25 p. 

King, P.B., 1955, A geologic section across the Southern Appalachians-An outline of the geology in the segment in 

Tennessee, North Carolina, and South Carolina, in Russell, 

R.J., ed., Guides to Southeastern geology: New York, 

Geological Society of America, p. 332-373. 

Matooka, J.M., and Grimes, D.J., 1976, Analytical precision of 

one-sixth order semiquantitative spectrographic analysis: 

U.S. Geological Survey Circular 738, 25 p. 

McCauley, C.K., and Butler, J.R., 1966, Gold resources of South 

Carolina: South Carolina State Development Board Division 

of Geology Bulletin no. 32, 78 p. 

Mertie, J.B., Jr., 1975, Monazite placers in the southeastern 

Atlantic States: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1390, 41 p. 

---1979, Monazite in the granitic rocks of the southeastern 

Atlantic States-An example of the use of heavy minerals in 

geologic exploration: U.S. Geological Survey Professional 

Paper 1094, 79 p. 

Nelson, A.E., 1988, Stacked crystalline thrust sheets and episodes 

of regional metamorphism in northeastern Georgia and northwestern South Carolina-A reinterpretation: U.S. Geological 

Survey Bulletin 1822, 16 p. 

Nelson, A.E., Horton, J.W., Jr., and Clarke, J.W., 1987, 

Generalized tectonic map of the Greenville 1° x 2° quadrangle, Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina: U.S. 

Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map 

MF-1898, scale 1:250,000. 

---1989, Geologic map of the Greenville 1°X2° quadrangle, 

Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 89-9, scale 1:250,000. 

Overstreet, W.C., 1967, The geologic occurrence of monazite: 

U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 530, 327 p. 

Overstreet, W.C., and Bell, H.B., III, 1965a, The crystalline 

rocks of South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 

1183, 126 p. 

---1965b, Geologic map of the crystalline rocks of South 

Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I--413, scale 1:250,000. 

References Cited 35 
Overstreet, W.C., White, A.M., Whitlow, J.W., Theobald, P.K., 

Jr., Caldwell, D.W., and Cuppels, N.P., 1968, Fluvial 

monazite deposits in the Southeastern United States: U.S. 

Geological Survey Professional Paper 568, 85 p. 

Rankama, Kalervo, and Sahama, Th.G., 1950, Geochemistry: 

Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 912 p. 

Rose, A.W., Hawkes, H.E., and Webb, J.S., 1979, Geochemistry in mineral exploration (2d ed.): New York, Academic 

Press, Inc., 657 p. 

Rowe, W.D., Jr., 1987, The geology and geochemistry of the 

Goodes Creek and Hawkins Branch tin occurrences in the 

Inner Peidmont belt, North Carolina: University of Texas at 

Dallas, unpub. Ph.D. dissertation, 443 p. 

Sloan, Earle, 1908, Catalogue of the mineral localities of South 

Carolina: South Carolina Geological Survey Series IV, Bulletin 2, 505 p. 

Theobald, P.K., Jr., 1962, Description, composition, and tenor of 

unconsolidated sediments in monazite-bearing tributaries to 

the Broad River in the western Piedmont of South Carolina 

and North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 654, 13 p. 

Theobald, P.K., Jr., Overstreet, W.C., and Thompson, C.E., 

1967, Minor elements in alluvial magnetite from the Inner 

Piedmont belt, North and South Carolina: U.S. Geological 

Survey Professional Paper 554-A, 34 p. 

Turekian, K.K., 1977, Geochemical distribution of elements, in 

Encyclopedia of Science and Technology (4th ed.): New 

York, McGraw-Hill, p. 627-630. 

U.S. Bureau of the Mint, 1882-83, Report of the Director of the 

Mint upon the statistics of the production of the precious 

metals in the United States [for the calendar years 1881-82]: 

Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 

variously paginated. 

---1884-1906, Report of the Director of the Mint upon the 

production of the precious metals in the United States [for the 

calendar years 1883-1905]: Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, variously paginated. 

36 Heavy Mineral Concentrates, Greenville 1°X2° Quadrangle, South Carolina 
SELECTED SERIES OF U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PUBLICATIONS 

Periodicals 

Earthquakes & Volcanoes (issued bimonthly). 

Preliminary Determination of Epicenters (issued monthly). 

Technical Books and Reports 

Professional Papers are mainly comprehensive scientific reports 

of wide and lasting interest and importance to professional scientists 

and engineers. Included are reports on the results of resource studies 

and of topographic, hydrologic, and geologic investigations. They also 

include collections of related papers addressing different aspects of a 

single scientific topic. 

Bulletins contain significant data and interpretations that are of 

lasting scientific interest but are generally more limited in scope or 

geographic coverage than Professional Papers. They include the results 

of resource studies and of geologic and topographic investigations, as 

well as collections of short papers related to a specific topic. 

Water-Supply Papers are comprehensive reports that present 

significant interpretive results of hydrologic investigations of wide 

interest to professional geologists, hydrologists, and engineers. The 

series covers investigations in all phases of hydrology, including 

hydrogeology, availability of water, quality of water, and use of water. 

Circulars present administrative information or important scientific information of wide popular interest in a format designed for 

distribution at no cost to the public. Information is usually of short-term 

interest. 

Water-Resources Investigations Reports are papers of an 

interpretive nature made available to the public outside the formal 

USGS publications series. Copies are reproduced on request unlike 

formal USGS publications, and they are also available for public 

inspection at depositories indicated in USGS catalogs. 

Open-File Reports include unpublished maJ!uscript reports, 

maps, and other material that are made available for public consultation 

at depositories. They are a nonpermanent form of publication that may 

be cited in other publications as sources of information. 

Maps 

Geologic Quadrangle Maps are multicolor geologic maps on 

topographic bases in 7.5- or 15-minute quadrangle formats (scales 

mainly 1:24,000 or 1 :62,500) showing bedrock, surficial, or engineering geology. Maps generally include brief texts; some maps include 

structure and columnar sections only. 

Geophysical Investigations Maps are on topographic or planimetric bases at various scales; they show results of surveys using 

geophysical techniques, such as gravity, magnetic, seismic, or radioactivity, which reflect subsurface structures that are of economic or 

geologic significance. Many maps include correlations with the geology. 

Miscellaneous Investigations Series Maps are on planimetric or 

topographic bases of regular and irregular areas at various scales; they 

present a wide variety of format and subject matter. The series also 

includes 7 .5-minute quadrangle photogeologic maps on planimetric 

bases that show geology as interpreted from aerial photographs. Series 

also includes maps of Mars and the Moon. 

Coal Investigations Maps are geologic maps on topographic or 

planimetric bases at various scales showing bedrock or surficial 

geology, stratigraphy, and structural relations in certain coal-resource 

areas. 

Oil and Gas Investigations Charts show stratigraphic information for certain oil and gas fields and other areas having petroleum 

potential. 

Miscellaneous Field Studies Maps are multicolor or blackand-white maps on topographic or planimetric bases on quadrangle or 

irregular areas at various scales. Pre-1971 maps show bedrock geology 

in relation to specific mining or mineral-deposit problems; post-1971 

maps are primarily black-and-white maps on various subjects such as 

environmental studies or wilderness mineral investigations. 

Hydrologic Investigations Atlases are multicolored or blackand-white maps on topographic or planimetric bases presenting a wide 

range of geohydrologic data of both regular and irregular areas; 

principal scale is 1:24,000, and regional studies are at 1:250,000 scale 

or smaller. 

Catalogs 

Permanent catalogs, as well as some others, giving comprehensive listings of U.S. Geological Survey publications are available under 

the conditions indicated below from the U.S. Geological Survey, 

Books and Open-File Reports Section, Federal Center, Box 25425, 

Denver, CO 80225. (See latest Price and Availability List.) 

"Publications of the Geological Survey, 1879-1961" may be 

purchased by mail and over the counter in paperback book form and as 

a set of microfiche. 

"Publications of the Geological Survey, 1962-1970" may be 

purchased by mail and over the counter in paperback book form and as 

a set of microfiche. 

"Publications of the U.S. Geological Survey, 1971-1981" may 

be purchased by mail and over the counter in paperback book form (two 

volumes, publications listing and index) and as a set of microfiche. 

Supplements for 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, and for subsequent years since the last permanent catalog may be purchased by 

mail and over the counter in paperback book form. 

State catalogs, "List of U.S. Geological Survey Geologic and 

Water-Supply Reports and Maps For (State)," may be purchased by 

mail and over the counter in paperback booklet form only. 

"Price and Availability List of U.S. Geological Survey Publications," issued annually, is available free of charge in paperback 

booklet form only. 

Selected copies of a monthly catalog "New Publications of the 

U.S. Geological Survey" are available free of charge by mail or may 

be obtained over the counter in paperback booklet form only. Those 

wishing a free subscription to the monthly catalog "New Publications of 

the U.S. Geological Survey" should write to the U.S. Geological 

Survey, 582 National Center, Reston, VA 22092. 

Note.-Prices of Government publications listed in older catalogs, announcements, and publications may be incorrect. Therefore, 

the prices charged may differ from the prices in catalogs, announcements, and publications.