• Investigation of polymetallic mineralization was conducted utilizing gravity and magnetic signatures.

• Anomalies are oriented in ENE-WSW and NNW-SSE directions, with depths ranging from 3 to 72 meters.

• The anomalies are interpreted to be due mainly to sulfides and oxides orebodies clusters within dolostone of Lower Liassic age.

• A map of potentially mineralized areas was created, aiding tactical exploration and reducing time and exploration costs.

The search for valuable mineral resources has driven humanity to investigate and comprehend the hidden treasures and geological structures beneath the Earth's surface. Among the various geological features, base-metal deposits stand out as a key player, offering several applications across industries. In the quest for effectively investigating these deposits, geophysical techniques have become essential tools offering non-invasive and highly informative ways to unveil the presence and the characteristics of mineral resources (Bahi et al., 2018; Dentith & Mudge, 2014; Eldosouky et al., 2023; Gadallah & Fisher, 2009; Jaffal et al., 2010; Lowrie & Fichtner, 2020; Müller et al., 2021; Zou et al., 2020).

The aim of geophysical surveys in mineral exploration is to quantify atypical or uncommon rock properties closely associated with, or directly indicative of, economic mineralization (Lowrie & Fichtner, 2020; Olomo et al., 2024). Since ore deposits are typically small compared to the Earth's crust, ore-targeting surveys are usually conducted after delineating a specific region, requiring precise and closely spaced observations (Bullock & Isles, 1994; Okiwelu et al., 2011). Therefore, a critical step in interpreting the results is to pinpoint areas that exhibit anomalies. These identified anomalies are then examined to determine the characteristics, size, orientation, and depth of the underlying cause (Hinze et al., 2013). This data serves as the basis for a more comprehensive exploration program, often involving drilling (Gadallah & Fisher, 2009; Marjoribanks, 2010).

This research paper aims to establish the fundamental groundwork for exploring Fe-Mn-Pb mineralization through a geophysical survey in the formerly operated Boumaadine area, with a specific emphasis on gravity and magnetic techniques. The objective is to unveil intricate subsurface structures, pinpoint potential mineralized zones, and develop mining exploration guidelines on a regional level. Prior to this survey, a geological assessment of the area was conducted, taking into account existing studies on the deposit and on-site observations.

The Boumaadine ore deposit is a significant mining area with sulfide and non-sulfide ores (Tobi et al., 2022, 2024). It is located at the Jbel Skindis anticline, near the northern border of the Eastern High Atlas, Morocco (Fig. 1a). The stratigraphic sequence within this structure includes essentially Triassic and Jurassic formations (Haddoumi et al., 2019), these latter are affected by Alpine tectonic fracturing, manifested by NE-SW to ESE-WNW trending faults (El Kochri & Chorowicz, 1995; Mattauer et al., 1977).

Figure 1. (a) Geological map of Jbel Skindis area, extracted from the geological map of Talsint (Haddoumi et al., 2019). (b) Local geological map of the Boumaadine area. (c) A-B cross-section.

Geologically, the Boumaadine area corresponds to a tectonically-exhumated Triassic-Lower Liassic slab. This flower-like structure is controlled by major reverse faults striking NE-SW (Figs. 1b & c): The Boumaadine steeply dipping fault (BF) constitutes the southern boundary, marking the contact with the Middle Liassic alternation of limestone and marls. Thus, the northern boundary is marked by a 50° SE dipping fault emphasizing contact with marls of the Middle Jurassic. The lithostratigraphy of the uplifted package includes:

• Triassic basalts, conglomerates, evaporites, and red claystone: conglomerates are mainly composed of quartz and schist fragments, cemented by red clay material rich in iron oxides, and the basalts show significant weathering/ hydrothermal alteration;

• Lower Liassic formations, consisting of massive dolostones at the base and bedded limestones at the top. The dolostone is primarily composed of ooids, peloids, and aggregate grains. Conversely, the limestone facies exhibit a micritic structure with a bird's-eye (fenestral) texture and lack internal structures.

Mineralization in the Boumaadine area includes two types, distinct with different morphologies, ore minerals, and alteration types (Tobi et al., 2024). Both types are primarily hosted in the dolostones of the Lower Liassic.

(i) Metasomatic ores; a substitution type in the dolostone formation is observed within highly altered zones extending over decametric extensions. The ores mainly consist of nonsulfide Fe–Mn–Pb bearing minerals such as coronadite, cesarolite, plumboferrite, jacobsite, hematite, and specularite. These minerals primarily replace the surrounding rocks and fill centimetric veins and open spaces in the altered dolostones. The main types of alterations observed in the host rock are hydrothermal dolomitization and hematitization, with a mineralogy predominantly composed of iron oxides including ferroan dolomite, goethite, hematite, jacobsite, and limonite (Figs. 2a, b & c).

Figure 2. (a) Veins of plumboferrite and hematite. (b) Coronadite veins associated with limonite alteration. (c) Microscopic picture of the hematite-jacobsite alteration facies. (d) Galena veins. (e) Galena with inclusion of chalcopyrite. (f) Scanning electron microscope (SEM) photomicrograph of galena. Gn: galena; hm: hematite; jac: jacobsite; cor: coronadite; cal: calcite; cp: chalcopyrite; plm: plumboferrite; mal: malachite (Tobi et al., 2024).

(ii) Mississippi Valley-Type (MVT) ores; this type of mineralization is directly related to tectonics. It is primarily arranged in decametric sulfide vein swarms, mainly composed of galena, pyrite, and chalcopyrite (Figs. 2d, e & f), and filling two major directions (E-W and NNW-SSE). These veins consist of a conjugate fracture system with a vertical recurrence.

3.1. Geophysical Prospecting Method Characteristics

Given the characteristics of the mineralization and its origins, gravity and magnetic prospecting have been identified as the most intriguing methods for locating the mineralization in the prospected location.

The magnetic method relies on measuring the overall magnetic field, which would be disturbed when the host rock and the mineralization exhibit distinct magnetic susceptibilities, leading to variations in the local magnetic field (Gadallah & Fisher, 2009; Lowrie & Fichtner, 2020). These local changes or “magnetic anomalies” can be identified and mapped using magnetometers (Bahi et al., 2018; Jaffal., et al., 2010; Ouchchen et al., 2021; Tazi et al., 2022). Generating a map of magnetic variation at the surface can provide an image of the distribution of different rock lithologies because all rocks are magnetically susceptible to some extent (Fig. 3), and can be used for the direct location of ore deposits with a specific magnetic signature (Marjoribanks, 2010). As in our case study, we seek magnetic anomalies that can reveal the presence of Fe-Mn-Pb oxides ore, given their association with ferromagnetic minerals such as hematite, specularite, jacobsite, and goethite.

Figure 3. Intrinsic magnetic susceptibility (SI) (Clark & Emerson, 1991).

On the other hand, considering the high density of the ores, particularly the sulfides, and their contrast with the dolostones hosting rocks (Table 1), it is possible to detect these dense ores using the gravity method. The lateral variations in the density of underlying rocks impact the local gravitational field, unveiling positive gravimetric anomalies that may be linked to geological structures or ore bodies (Eldosouky et al., 2023; Gadallah & Fisher, 2009; Jaffal et al., 2010; Zou et al., 2020).

Table 1 . Densities of rocks and minerals (Roberts et al., 1990; Schumann, 1993).

Rock Type	Density (g/cm3)	Ores Type	Density (g/cm3)
Dolomite	2.28-2.90	Galena	7.40-7.60
Limestone	2.50-2.80	Pyrite	4.50-5.20
Sandstone	2.00-2.60	Chalcopyrite	4.10-4.30
Clay	1.63-2.60	Hematite	4.90-5.30
Basalt	2.70-3.10	Goethite	3.30-4.30
Evaporite	1.86-2.98	Coronadite	5.00-5.44

3.2. Fieldwork Conducted

In this study, we conducted ground surveys for both gravity and magnetic fields. These ore-targeting surveys were carried out in a prospective area of the Boumaadine mineralized field, covering a 700-meter-long by 200-meterwide area. The surveys followed a detailed high-resolution investigation to yield a detailed pattern of the gravity and magnetic field variations (Fig. 4).

Figure 4. (a) Magnetic survey stations. (b) Gravity survey stations.

Magnetic data were acquired using a SCINTREX magnetometer (ENVIMAG). Measurements were conducted at selected points that formed a parallel mesh over the prospected area, with a spacing of 20 m in the NE-SW direction and 10 m in the NW-SE direction (Fig. 4a). Prior to each measurement, all metal objects likely to influence the magnetic field were removed. Additionally, the sensor of the magnetometer was mounted on a pole to maintain its head free of any near-surface magnetic ‘noise’. Regular measurements at a stationary base station were taken every two minutes to account for diurnal drift effects.

In the gravity survey, measurements were acquired using a CG3M gravimeter providing a 0.04 mGal precision, following a network of stations that forms a parallel grid of 23 profiles striking NW-SE and spaced 25 m apart; each profile comprises 7 stations spaced 15 m apart (Fig. 4b). To account for instrumental drift, we followed a looped path between measurement stations and a local base station.

The implementation and leveling of the survey stations were conducted using a Spectra SP60 differential GPS (DGPS) operating in real-time kinetic mode (RTK), which offers a horizontal precision of less than a centimetre, and a vertical precision approximately twice the horizontal one. This led to enhanced location accuracy and precise geolocalization. Furthermore, a local digital elevation model (DEM) was generated to account for the gravity terrain correction.

3.3. Data Correction and Interpretation

3.3.1. Data Correction

a. Gravity Data

Gravity observations are typically affected by instrumental, terrain, and planetary sources as well as subsurface mass variations (W. Hinze et al., 2013). Field gravity readings must be corrected to provide data that may be used (Table 2); The first correction (Gi) compensates for the height difference between levelling and gravity measurement (Scintrex, 1995). Regular readings at the local base station help correct for short-term instrument drift (Bonvalot et al., 1998; Hinze et al., 2013). Subsequently, the measurements were converted to absolute gravity values (Ga) by correlation with the Boulmane gravity control point (X: -4.85769°, Y: 33.45872°). A latitude correction is required due to the changes that arise from the differences in the observed gravity taken at different latitudes (Lowrie & Fichtner, 2020). An important adjustment (Gfa) is then made to address gravity variations due to the survey station's height above sea level (Dubois et al., 2011). The Bouguer slab correction (Gbs) corrects for material between sea level and measurement elevations (Dubois et al., 2011; Lowrie & Fichtner, 2020), this was done assuming a reference density of 2.5 g/cm³. Additionally, a Terrain Correction (TC) is crucial to compensate for topographic relief variations near each observation point. To address this, we utilized the Oasis Montaj Gravity and Terrain Correction (GTC) with a regional Digital Elevation Model (DEM) covering a 150 km radius, draped over a more detailed local DEM model within the survey area (Geosoft, 2015). This produces a correction grid used to calculate detailed terrain corrections at each gravity observation location.

Table 2 . Table of used formulas.

Correction	Formula
Instrument Height correction (Gi)	Gi = Gr + (0.3086*(H + h)). Gr: gravity reading, H: tripod height, and h: sensor height.
Conversion of readings to absolute values (Ga)	Ga = Gb + ΔGi Gb: control-point gravity absolute value, ΔGi: difference of the gravity reading between the control-point and the local station.
Latitude Correction (Gn)	Gn = 978031.85*(1 + 0.005278895*(Sin2(L)) + 0.000023462*(Sin4 (L))). L: Latitude.
Free Air Corrected Gravity (Gfa)	Gfa = 0.3086*Z. Z: Altitude.
Bouguer Slab Correction (Gbs)	Gbs = -0.04193 * ρ * Z. ρ: density, Z: altitude.
Corrected Gravity (Bouguer Anomaly)	G=Ga − Gn + Gfa + Gbs + TC. TC: terrain correction value.

The above-mentioned corrections were applied to calculate the Bouguer anomaly map, followed by deriving the residual anomaly map through the removal of the regional field (Hinze et al., 2005).

b. Magnetic Data

In comparison to the pre-processing of gravity data, there are a few corrections needed for magnetic data: (i) a compensation needs to be made to account for the fluctuation of the geomagnetic field intensity at the Earth's surface during a day, this diurnal variation is related to the part of the earth’s magnetic field that originates in the ionosphere (Lowrie & Fichtner, 2020). The effect of the diurnal variation was corrected by installing a magnetometer at a fixed base station within the survey area (Fig. 4a), which constantly records the time and magnetic field every two minutes. Then, the appropriate corrections were made from these control records. (ii) the second correction is made to eliminate the regional magnetic gradient components. To do this, the International Geomagnetic Reference Field (IGRF) model was used to obtain the residual magnetic field.

3.3.2. Data Processing and Interpretation

Following acquisition, leveling and corrections, magnetic and gravimetric data processing was carried out. It typically consists of many standard display and enhancement methods, enabling accurate and meaningful data analysis and facilitating interpretation.

The first essential step in processing and interpreting magnetic data is to apply the pole-reduction filter. This latter makes it possible to reposition the magnetic anomaly directly above its source (Baranov, 1957). Then, various subsequent enhancement techniques were applied to both the reduced-to-pole residual magnetic map and the residual gravity map, including the horizontal and vertical derivatives, analytic signal, and Euler deconvolution. These processes allow better distinction of anomalies, accurate representation of geological boundaries such as contacts or faults, and good reporting of the depths of the sources (Dentith & Mudge, 2014; Eldosouky et al., 2023; Gadallah & Fisher, 2009; Hinze et al., 2013; Marjoribanks, 2010). Finally, to better determine the geometric and physical characteristics of the structures responsible for the most significant anomalies, the resulting geophysical maps were conjunct with samescale geological data in Geographical Information System (GIS) software.

4.1. Magnetic Method

4.1.1. Residual Magnetic Field and Reduced-to-pole Magnetic Field

The Boumaadine residual magnetic field map reveals a heterogeneous subsurface distribution reflected by a high contrast of the magnetic field values following the NNWSSE direction, and a moderate variation in the ENE-WSW direction (Fig. 6a). The map shows areas with both strong and weak magnetic anomalies, notably a large bipolar anomaly in the Eastern part of the map, with values ranging between 75 nT and 170 nT.

Figure 5. (a) Residual magnetic field map. (b) Reduced-to-pole magnetic field map.

Figure 6. (a) Analytic signal map. (b) Horizontal Y derivative map of the pole-reduced magnetic field.

However, in the map, the anomalies are not directly associated with their causal sources, as their shapes and amplitudes are influenced by variations in the inclination and declination of the Earth's magnetic field. To better distinguish and represent anomalies, we used pole reduction; this method was developed by Baranov & Naudy (1964), it involves calculating the magnetic values that would have been observed if the source of the anomaly had been at the North Pole, which is essential for better locating the anomalies (Hao et al., 2018; Smith et al., 2022; Yao et al., 2003). The reduced-to-pole map shows anomalies with magnetic values ranging from 65 nT to 195 nT (Fig. 6b). These magnetic anomalies are oriented mainly in an ENEWSW direction, and present a slight sub-meridian trend. As we seek for ferromagnetic bodies, we identified the most important, strong and well-individualized magnetic anomalies, these latter have been classified into four distinct zones:

4.1.2. Analytic Signal and Horizontal Derivative

The analytic signal allows the spatial distribution to be concentrated around the center of mass associated with the origin of the anomaly (Nabighian, 1984). Analysis of the analytic signal map (Fig. 6a) clearly illustrates the presence of high amplitude signals in the central and the Eastern parts of the map, especially around the anomaly MA-1. These areas with high analytic signals probably correspond to high-magnetization bodies, particularly in the dolomites of the Lower Liassic. In the western part of the map, we also note the individualization of strong values associated with the MA-3 and MA-4 anomalies.

Magnetic field horizontal-gradient maps are used to more accurately highlight anomalous contacts or lateral facies changes, enabling better identification of the linear boundaries of susceptibility contrasts (Bouzekraoui et al., 2024; Jaffal et al., 2010; Wijns et al., 2005). Given the general orientation of the geological feature in this area, we used the Y horizontal derivative. The resulting map shows the existence of several lineaments that mainly affect the dolostone formation; these lineaments are likely related to NNW, ENE and ESEtrending fault group. These directions are consistent with the structural measurements from the fieldwork. Moreover, some of the obtained lineaments emphasize the lithological contact, especially the southern boundary of the Triassic rocks and the northern boundary of the lower Liassic dolostones (Fig. 6b).

4.1.3. Euler Deconvolution

Among several numerical methods used for estimating the depths of the geological structures responsible for anomalies, Euler deconvolution stands out as a widely used method because of its ease of implementation and utilization, making it the tool of choice for interpretation. It was established first by Thompson (1982) and later adapted and improved by Keating (1998), Silva & Barbosa (2003) and Reid et al., (2014). The use of Euler deconvolution adds an extra dimension to the interpretation; it is particularly effective for delineating contacts between different geological structures and allows rapid assessment of their depths (Bouzekraoui et al., 2024; Jaffal, Goumi, Kchikach, et al., 2010; Okpoli & Akingboye, 2019).

Euler deconvolution requires the x-, y-, and z-derivatives of the data in addition to the structural index (SI), which is an integer number that varies for different potential fields and source types (Reid et al., 2014). In our case, a structural index of 2.5 was used to compute the Euler solutions, as we have two types of mineralization: massive and vein-type. Superimposing the Euler depth solutions on the analytic signal map shows that the depth of the majority of anomalies ranges from 3 to up to 72 m. These depth levels imply that the sources of the anomalies are not rooted so deeply (Fig. 7).

Figure 7. Analytic magnetic field signal map with superimposed Euler solutions.

4.2. Gravity Survey

4.2.1. Bouguer and Residual Anomaly Map

The Boumaadine Bouguer anomaly map highlights broad long-wavelength anomalies with gravity field values ranging from -18.46 to -21 mGal. We can distinguish two distinct NE-SW-trending zones (Fig. 8a).

Figure 8. (a) Bouguer anomaly map. (b) Residual gravity map.

The residual map (Fig. 8b) was obtained by subtracting the regional gravity field from the Bouguer anomaly using a first-order polynomial trend surface. It shows shortwavelength variations; hence, the anomalies on this map are therefore more detailed than those on the Bouguer map, with small and individualized forms, in which the gravity values range from -0.18 mGal to 0.17 mGal. These anomalies are interspersed in the study area and generally present two preferential orientations, ENE-WSW and NNWSSE.

Areas with high-density bodies compared to the surrounding rocks are reflected by positive anomalies with high gravity values, these latter were organized into three distinct areas denoted as GA-1, GA-2 and GA-3: The GA-1 anomaly refers to a cluster of gravity anomalies located mainly in the Eastern part of the region. These subrounded shape anomalies interrelate with each other; they trend approximatively in the E-W direction and are marked with fairly high gravity values (0.12 to 0.18 mGal). Anomalies GA-2 and GA-3 have an ellipsoidal shape elongated in the NNW-SSE direction, and extending over a hundred meters. These anomalies may suggest the presence of dense geological structures associated with orebodies. We also note that Triassic rocks are generally delineated by negative gravity values (-0.14 to -0.18 mGal), demonstrating fractured and low-density rocks.

4.2.2. Vertical & Horizontal Derivatives

The vertical and horizontal derivatives are transformations that helps to precise the anomalies' locations by sharpening their edges (Eldosouky et al., 2023; Lowrie & Fichtner, 2020). It has long been used in gravity data processing to improve localized and near-surface features, thus highlighting high frequencies and increasing the gravity map's interpretation (Baranov, 1957; Bullock & Isles, 1994; Hinze et al., 2005; Okpoli & Akingboye, 2019).

The first vertical derivative gravity anomaly map (Fig. 9a) reveals that some of the anomalies have been highlighted and re-positioned when compared to the residual anomaly map (Fig. 8b). The map underlines high-intensity gravity anomalies occupying the central and Eastern parts and extending over hundreds of meters more than those in other sections of the map, which indicate the presence of denser bodies enclosed, especially in the dolostones, and partially covering the base of the limestone formation. This map also underscores the high-frequency signal of the western GA-2 and GA-3 anomalies, which reflects their association with density variations in near-surface rocks.

Figure 9. (a) Vertical derivative map. (b) Y-axis Horizontal derivative map.

The Y-axis horizontal gradient map (Fig. 9b) allowed locating lineaments that influence the distribution of density contrasts. These abrupt variations in gravity can be associated with density variations, which are often linked to faults or geological contacts (Hinze et al., 2013; Jaffal et al., 2010). The map highlights the southern boundary of the Triassic rocks outcropping along the Boumaadine fault, and shows the presence of a few ENE- to SE- and NNW-trending lineaments that affect particularly the dolostones. Moreover, the map illustrates that GA-2 and GA-3 anomalies could be associated with NNW-trending geological structures.

4.2.3. Euler Deconvolution

Superimposing the Euler solutions on the first vertical derivative map allows us to locate the depth of the sources that generated the anomalies. Euler deconvolution with a Structural Index (SI) of 1.0 reveals predominantly shallow solutions, with depths varying from 7 to 52 meters (Fig. 10). Most of the anomalies originated from depths ranging 10 to 30 meters.

Figure 10. Euler solutions superimposed on the vertical derivative map.

4.3. Data Integration and Field Verification of the Geophysical Anomalies

This section presents the analysis of the results of the geophysical data and their correlation with geological and mining data. The aim is to gain a better understanding of the relationships between gravity and magnetic anomalies and the geological structures in the Boumaadine region. The map represented in Fig. 11 shows the results of superimposing the maxima of gravity vertical derivative anomalies and the magnetic analytic signal anomalies on the Boumaadine geological map.

Figure 11. Superimposing of maxima of the gravity vertical derivative anomalies, and the magnetic analytic signal anomalies on the Boumaadine geological map.

Analysis of the map reveals a positive relationship between magnetic and gravity anomalies. Besides, most of the anomalies are strongly correlated with mapped geological structures:

i. The MA-1 magnetic anomaly and GA-1 gravity anomaly groups show significant superposition, especially in the Eastern part of the study area. This suggests the presence of both magnetically susceptible and dense bodies, most likely due to the co-presence of oxides (hematite, coronadite, plumboferrite) and sulfides (galena, pyrite) mineralization within the dolostones:

ii. Anomalies (GA-2, MA-2) and (GA-3, MA-3) are partially superimposed, and are located around the areas marked with the outcrop of some lead veins and a large iron-oxides cap (Fig. 12e). This indicates that these zones are potentially mineralized and may point to the presence of hidden dense and magnetically susceptible orebodies.

Figure 12. (a) Hematite vein crosscutting basalts. (b) Hematitization in the basalts. (c) Local outcrop of iron-rich altered dolostones. (d) Centimetric veins anastomosing dolostones. (e) Large gossan outcropping within the dolostone. (f) Iron-oxide veins enclosed in calcareous rocks.

iii. However, some areas marked by the outcrop of lead mineralization (e.g., Figs. 2d & 12d) haven’t shown any geophysical signature, which may indicate their small sizes or that they are superficial.

Besides, the magnetic anomalies that originated particularly from the Triassic and Lower Liassic iron-rich altered rocks emphasize the path of circulation of mineralizing fluids, which confirms the genetic model proposed by Tobi et al., (2024), involving the migration of mineralizing fluids through the Triassic series along the Boumaadine fault before percolating to the Liassic carbonate formations.

The geophysical maps produced in this study can serve as a guide for further exploration of the mineralized zones within the study area. These maps have allowed us to identify specific locations suitable for exploration drilling (cf. Fig. 11). Furthermore, the method used in this study can be used as a guide for additional exploration in the entire Jbel Skindis chain at broader scale and to other geologically similar regions.

High-resolution geophysical investigation conducted in the Boumaadine region revealed valuable insights into the subsurface geological structures and mineralization potential. The magnetic method, comprising analysis of the residual magnetic field, reduced-to-pole magnetic field, analytic signal and horizontal derivative identified several anomalies of a preferential ENE-WSW trend, indicating the presence of magnetized bodies within the study area. Similarly, the gravity survey, including analysis of Bouguer and residual anomalies along with vertical and horizontal derivatives, revealed significant anomalies suggesting the presence of dense geological structures.

Integration of magnetic and gravity data with geological and mining information revealed a positive correlation between magnetic and gravity anomalies. The analysis showed significant superposition between magnetic and gravity anomalies especially in the Eastern part of the study area, suggesting the presence of magnetically susceptible and dense bodies, likely associated with both oxides and sulfides mineralization within the dolostones. Additionally, the concentration of geophysical anomalies around areas marked with the outcrop of lead veins and gossans further confirmed the existence of potential mineralization zones in the western part of the investigated region.

The Euler deconvolution further provided depth estimations for the source’s depths, gravity anomalies range from 7 to 52 meters, with most sources between 10 and 30 meters. In contrast, magnetic anomalies exhibit a broader depth range extending from 3 to 72 meters, with generally shallower depths. Both methods reveal significant anomalies within the 10–30-meter depth range, reinforcing their correlation and suggesting concentrated mineralization. Additionally, deeper magnetic anomalies (beyond 50 meters) may indicate the extension of mineralized structures, warranting further drilling.

The methodology employed in this study was effectively implemented on the Boumaadine mineralized field, highlighting several areas of interest for further tactical exploration and exploitation. This offers a model for prospecting similar mineral deposits at the regional scale and in other regions with similar geological context.

Subsequent phases of the study will include the upcoming drilling campaign, along with the creation of cross-sections that integrate both geophysical anomalies and geological interpretations. This will help to strengthen the correlation between the geophysical data and the geological features, improving the overall accuracy and reliability of the findings.