[MSA-talk] Double names for mineral species

Rik Dillen rik.dillen at skynet.be
Wed May 28 17:33:49 EDT 2014


The same roughly evenly divided camps were involved in the naming of ardennite (in competition with 'dewalquite'), and one more example is sartorite versus 'scleroclase'.

On the other hand it is good that there is now one and only one authority (IMA) that decides on a (one) distinct and definitive name for each species to avoid confusion.

Grts,

 

Rik DILLEN 
E-mail  <mailto:rik.dillen at skynet.be> rik.dillen at skynet.be 
Homepage :  <http://users.skynet.be/rik.dillen> http://users.skynet.be/rik.dillen 

 

MINERANT 2015 - 9&10 May 2015

Antwerp Expo - Antwerpen - Belgium

 <http://www.minerant.org> www.minerant.org

 

From: msa-talk-bounces at minlists.org [mailto:msa-talk-bounces at minlists.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Carter
Sent: Wednesday, 28 May, 2014 22:54
To: Robert Tracy
Cc: msa-talk at minlists.org
Subject: Re: [MSA-talk] Mineral name for perovskite-structured (Mg, Fe) silicate?

 

Not that it will change your opinion in any way, but…

 

Titanite was first described by Martin Heinrich Klaproth in 1795 (Beiträge zur Chemischen Kenntniss der Mineralkörper).  The same species was rediscovered and named Sphene in 1801 by René Just Haüy.  There are many cases where species have had different names.  On my shelves, the Glossary of Obsolete Mineral Names lists some 30,000 terms which are no longer used.  It is something of an accident of history that the ‘titanite’ / ‘sphene’ camps were divided roughly evenly.  It was likely to happen to something and titanite / sphene isn’t the only case: just ask IUPAC about the sulphur / sulfur divide [1].  Here the loser receives some minor consolation as the mineral sulphur is composed of sulfur.

 

Best wishes,

Jerry

 

[1]  <http://www.nature.com/nchem/journal/v1/n5/full/nchem.301.html> http://www.nature.com/nchem/journal/v1/n5/full/nchem.301.html

 

 

On May 28, 2014, at 1:19 PM, Robert Tracy < <mailto:rtracy at vt.edu> rtracy at vt.edu> wrote:

 

Thanks for the support from sphene-thusiasts, both on the list and in private messages.

 

One of the reasons I am especially nostalgic about the name "sphene" is the possibility that this very nice word is also one of the roots of the English word "spoon", by way of many linguistic byways between Greek, old English, Old German and many others. Presumably this connection derives from the vaguely wedge-like shape a spoon has in profile. See the Wiktionary listing below:

 

 <http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=spoon&allowed_in_frame=0> spoon (n.)  <http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=spoon> Image removed by sender. Look up spoon at Dictionary.com

Old English spon "chip, sliver, shaving, splinter of wood," from Proto-Germanic *spe-nu- (cognates: Old Norse spann, sponn "chip, splinter," Swedish spån "a wooden spoon," Old Frisian spon, Middle Dutch spaen, Dutch spaan, Old High German span, German Span "chip, splinter"), from PIE *spe- (2) "long, flat piece of wood" (cognates: Greek spathe "spade," also possibly Greek sphen "wedge"). 

 

Bob

 

Dr. Robert J. Tracy

Prof. of Geosciences

Associate Department Head

Director, Museum of Geosciences

Virginia Tech

Blacksburg VA 24061-0420

540-231-5980

540-231-3386 (F)

 

 

 

On May 28, 2014, at 3:33 AM, Dan Harlov wrote:

 

Here here Bob !!!

 

I have an avid dislike of that rather silly name titanite instead of using the much more atypical and more interesting name sphene.  Titanite would actually be a much more accurate name for rutile.   This is one of the few things that Eric Essene and I ever agreed on - I might note in passing.  

 

In fact - I think the whole ' ite ' phenomena in naming minerals is greatly overblown.  Thank god these rules were not around when minerals such as quartz, spinel, and hornblende were being named !   At least we have some variety there.  

 

 

 

On May 27, 2014, at 9:49 PM, Robert Tracy wrote:

 

Anachronism it may be in your opinion (and the IMA's) but I will resolutely continue to use the name Sphene whenever I am allowed to get away with it. The IMA has done some stupid things over the years (magnesian ferrosilite anyone?) but the outlawing of the beautiful (and unambiguous) name Sphene is top of my list.

 

Dr. Robert J. Tracy

Prof. of Geosciences

Associate Department Head

Director, Museum of Geosciences

Virginia Tech

Blacksburg VA 24061-0420

540-231-5980

540-231-3386 (F)

 

 

 

On May 27, 2014, at 11:28 AM, Anton Chakhmouradian wrote:

 

For all purposes, MgO with subordinate Fe in the lower mantle IS periclase (its rock-salt structure is very robust and persists to > 200 GPa; Duffy et al., Phys. Rev. Let., 74, 1371). At ambient conditions, FeO is isostructural with periclase and known as the mineral wüstite (in addition to metallurgical slags, it occurs in meteorites and a few obscure terrestrial environments). The intermediate Mg-dominant members should then be termed Fe2+-rich (-bearing) periclase, according to the IMA guidelines. The rock-salt structure of FeO transforms into a rhombohedral polymorph at 18 GPa, but the presence of Mg seems to stabilize the rock-salt arrangement throughout the lower-mantle P range (see, e.g., Lin et al., PNAS, 100, 4405). That means that, from the standpoint of nomenclature, we are dealing with compressed intermediate members of the periclase-wüstite series. Any other name applied in the literature (magnesiowüstite, ferropericlase, ferroan periclase, etc.) is not in accord with the IMA recommendations. Of course, people still use this “illegal” terminology, just like one can still bump into sphene, melanite, picroilmenite and numerous other anachronisms in the Min-Pet literature.

 

Anton Chakhmouradian

University of Manitoba

 

 

From: msa-talk-bounces at minlists.org [mailto:msa-talk-bounces at minlists.org] On Behalf Of Charles Carrigan
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 9:56 AM
To: David Hirsch; MSA-talk (msa-talk at minlists.org)
Subject: Re: [MSA-talk] Mineral name for perovskite-structured (Mg, Fe) silicate?

 

How about MgO with rock-salt structure referred to as “magnesiowustite”?  I’ve even seen a reference to FeO as “ferropericlase”. 

 

 

Best,

Charles

 

<image003.png>Charles W. Carrigan, Ph.D.

 <http://geology.olivet.edu/carrigan.htm> Professor of Geoscience │  <http://geology.olivet.edu/> Dept. of Chemistry & Geosciences

Director,  <http://www.olivet.edu/academics/honors-program/> University Honors Program

Olivet Nazarene University │ One University Avenue │ Bourbonnais, IL 60914

Office: 815.939.5346 │  <https://plus.google.com/106934864033790932269/about> web │  <mailto:ccarriga at olivet.edu> email │ Honors: 815.928.5613 │ Fax: 815.939.5071

 

 

From: msa-talk-bounces at minlists.org [mailto:msa-talk-bounces at minlists.org] On Behalf Of David Hirsch
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 9:31 AM
To: MSA public List serve
Subject: [MSA-talk] Mineral name for perovskite-structured (Mg, Fe) silicate?

 

Friends-

I’ve just read a news release online about the new Zhang, et al. Science paper "Disproportionation of (Mg,Fe)SiO3 perovskite in Earth’s deep lower mantle”.  Is there a mineral name for the perovskite-structured (Mg,Fe)SiO3 mineral?  If not, then shouldn’t we come up with one?  It seems to me that the name “perovskite” should apply to the CaTiO3 mineral, and that it’s wrong to apply it to the isostructural silicate, just as we don’t give the same mineral name to halite and galena.  The article title isn’t so bad, but when you get news releases that include this kind of thing, then there’s a real problem:

 

"The prevailing theory has been that the majority of the lower mantle is made up of a single ferromagnesian silicate mineral, commonly called perovskite (Mg,Fe)SiO3) defined through its chemistry and structure. It was thought that perovskite didn't change structure over the enormous range of pressures and temperatures spanning the lower mantle”

 

The release’s author here has presumably misinterpreted the article’s title to infer that “perovskite" is the name of the mantle mineral, rather than "(Mg,Fe)SiO3 perovskite”, indicating a perovskite-structured silicate.

 

I understand that an official mineral name is not possible, since it cannot be found occurring naturally and fully described, but perhaps if the community decided on a name we could use in lieu of the (to me) troubling "(Mg,Fe)SiO3 perovskite” or worse “perovskite”, then there might be a little more clarity and a little less confusion out there, at least among mineralogy students.

-Dave

 

============================

Dave Hirsch

Associate Professor

Department of Geology

Western Washington University

alternate email: dhirsch at mac.com

http://www.davehirsch.com <http://www.davehirsch.com/> 

cell: (360) 389-3583

work: (360) 650-2166

fb: http://www.facebook.com/dave.hirsch

============================

 

_______________________________________________
MSA-talk mailing list
MSA-talk at minlists.org
http://lists.minlists.org/mailman/listinfo/msa-talk

 

_______________________________________________
MSA-talk mailing list
 <mailto:MSA-talk at minlists.org> MSA-talk at minlists.org
 <http://lists.minlists.org/mailman/listinfo/msa-talk> http://lists.minlists.org/mailman/listinfo/msa-talk

 

Daniel Harlov

Section 3.3 Chemistry and Physics of Earth Materials

Helmholtz-Zentrum Potsdam

Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum - GFZ

Stiftung des öff. Rechts Land Brandenburg 

Telegrafenberg

D-14473 Potsdam                                             

FR Germany     

 

international tel +49 (331) 288-1456

international fax +49 (331) 288-1402

email:  <mailto:dharlov at gfz-potsdam.de> dharlov at gfz-potsdam.de        

  

 

 

Daniel Harlov

Section 3.3 Chemistry and Physics of Earth Materials

Helmholtz-Zentrum Potsdam

Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum - GFZ

Stiftung des öff. Rechts Land Brandenburg 

Telegrafenberg

D-14473 Potsdam                                             

FR Germany     

 

international tel +49 (331) 288-1456

international fax +49 (331) 288-1402

email:  <mailto:dharlov at gfz-potsdam.de> dharlov at gfz-potsdam.de        

  

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________
MSA-talk mailing list
 <mailto:MSA-talk at minlists.org> MSA-talk at minlists.org
 <http://lists.minlists.org/mailman/listinfo/msa-talk> http://lists.minlists.org/mailman/listinfo/msa-talk

 

_______________________________________________
MSA-talk mailing list
 <mailto:MSA-talk at minlists.org> MSA-talk at minlists.org
http://lists.minlists.org/mailman/listinfo/msa-talk

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.minlists.org/pipermail/msa-talk/attachments/20140528/1a62c836/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 335 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.minlists.org/pipermail/msa-talk/attachments/20140528/1a62c836/attachment-0001.jpe>


More information about the MSA-talk mailing list