1. |
|
|
2. |
- Bosi, Ferdinando, et al.
(författare)
-
Lowering R3m Symmetry in Mg-Fe-Tourmalines: The Crystal Structures of Triclinic Schorl and Oxy-Dravite, and the Mineral luinaite-(OH) Discredited
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Minerals. - : MDPI AG. - 2075-163X. ; 12:4, s. 1-10
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Discreditation of the monoclinic tourmaline mineral species luinaite-(OH), ideally (Na,▯)(Fe2+,Mg)3Al6(BO3)3Si6O18(OH)4 was approved by the IMA-CNMNC (proposal 21-L) and is described. We analyzed two luinaite-(OH) samples: one from the type locality Cleveland tin mine, Luina, Waratah, Tasmania, Australia, and the other from Blue Mountain Saddle (Bald Hornet Claim), North Bend, King County, Washington, DC, USA. Biaxial (−) crystals representative of the studied samples were spectroscopically (Mössbauer, polarized Fourier transform infrared, optical absorption spectroscopy), chemically (nuclear microprobe analysis and electron microprobe analysis), and structurally characterized (single-crystal X-ray diffraction). Results show the occurrence of a triclinic structure for the studied luinaite-(OH) samples, which differs only in terms of a slight structural distortion from typical trigonal tourmaline structure (the topology of the structure is retained). As a result, following the IMA-CNMNC and tourmaline nomenclature rules, the triclinic luinaite-(OH) from the type locality (Australia) can be considered as the triclinic dimorph of schorl, as its chemical composition corresponds to schorl, and thus it should be referred as schorl-1A. Similarly, the triclinic sample from the USA can be considered as the triclinic dimorph of oxy-dravite, as its chemical composition corresponds to oxy-dravite, and then is referred to as oxy-dravite-1A.
|
|
3. |
- Bosi, Ferdinando, et al.
(författare)
-
On the application of the IMA-CNMNC dominant-valency rule to complex mineral compositions
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Mineralogical magazine. - : Mineralogical Society. - 0026-461X .- 1471-8022. ; 83:5, s. 627-632
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Mineral species should be identified by an end-member formula and by using the dominant-valency rule as recommended by the IMA–CNMNC. However, the dominant-end-member approach has also been used in the literature. These two approaches generally converge, but for some intermediate compositions, significant differences between the dominant-valency rule and the dominant end-member approach can be observed. As demonstrated for garnet-supergroup minerals, for example, the end-member approach is ambiguous, as end-member proportions strongly depend on the calculation sequence. For this reason, the IMA–CNMNC strongly recommends the use of the dominant-valency rule for mineral nomenclature, because it alone may lead to unambiguous mineral identification. Although the simple application of the dominant-valency rule is successful for the identification of many mineral compositions, sometimes it leads to unbalanced end-member formulae, due to the occurrence of a coupled heterovalent substitution at two sites along with a heterovalent substitution at a single site. In these cases, it may be useful to use the site-total-charge approach to identify the dominant root-charge arrangement on which to apply the dominant-constituent rule. The dominant-valency rule and the site-totalcharge approach may be considered two procedures complementary to each other for mineral identification. Their critical point is to find the most appropriate root-charge and atomic arrangements consistent with the overriding condition dictated by the end-member formula. These procedures were approved by the IMA−CNMNC in May 2019.
|
|
4. |
|
|
5. |
|
|
6. |
|
|
7. |
|
|
8. |
|
|
9. |
|
|
10. |
|
|
11. |
|
|
12. |
|
|
13. |
|
|
14. |
|
|
15. |
|
|
16. |
|
|
17. |
|
|
18. |
|
|
19. |
|
|
20. |
|
|
21. |
|
|
22. |
|
|
23. |
|
|
24. |
|
|
25. |
|
|