Document Type

Review

Publication Title

Mineralogical Magazine

Rights and Access Note

This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s).

Publication Date

8-1-2008

First Page

839

Last Page

876

Issue Number

4

Volume Number

72

Abstract/ Summary

Minerals isostructural with sapphirine-1A, sapphirine-2M, and surinamite are closely related chain silicates that pose nomenclature problems because of the large number of sites and potential constituents, including several (Be, B, As, Sb) that are rare or absent in other chain silicates. Our recommended nomenclature for the sapphirine group (formerly-aenigmatite group) makes extensive use of precedent, but applies the rules to all known natural compositions, with flexibility to allow for yet undiscovered compositions such as those reported in synthetic materials. These minerals are part of a polysomatic series composed of pyroxene or pyroxene-like and spinel modules, and thus we recommend that the sapphirine supergroup should encompass the polysomatic series. The first level in the classification is based on polysome, i.e. each group within the supergroup Corresponds to a single polysome. At the second level, the sapphirine group is divided into subgroups according to the occupancy of the two largest M sites, namely, sapphirine (Mg), aenigmatite (Na), and rhonite (Ca). Classification at the third level is based on the occupancy of the smallest M site with most shared edges, M7, at which the dominant cation is most often Ti (aenigmatite, rhonite, makarochkinite), Fe(3+) (wilkinsonite, dorrite, hogtuvaite) or Al (sapphirine, khmaralite); much less common is Cr (krinovite) and Sb (welshite). At the fourth level, the two most polymerized T sites are considered together, e.g. ordering of Be at these sites distinguishes hogtuvaite, makarochkinite and khmaralite. Classification at the fifth level is based on X(Mg) = Mg/(Mg + Fe(2+)) at the M sites (excluding the two largest and M7). In principle, this criterion could be expanded to include other divalent cations at these sites, e.g. Mn. To date, most minerals have been found to be either Mg-dominant (X(mg) > 0.5), or Fe(2+)-dominant (X(Mg) < 0.5), at these M sites. However, X(mg) ranges from 1.00 to 0.03 in material described as rhonite, i.e. there are two species present, one Mg-dominant, the other Fe(2+)-dominant. Three other potentially new species are a Mg-dominant analogue of wilkinsonite, rhonite in the Allende meteorite, which is distinguished front rhonite and dorrite in that Mg rather than Ti or FC(3+) is dominant at M7, and an Al-dominant analogue of sapphirine, in which Al > Si at the two most polymerized T sites vs. Al < Si in sapphirine. Further splitting of the supergroup based on occupancies other than those specified above is not recommended.

Citation/Publisher Attribution

Grew, ES, Halenius, U, Pasero, M, and Barbier, J, 2008, Recommended Nomenclature for the Sapphirine and Surinamite Groups (Sapphirine Supergroup): Mineralogical Magazine, v. 72, p. 839-876.

DOI

10.1180/minmag.2008.072.4.839

Version

publisher's version of the published document

Download

Share

 

Rights Statement

In Copyright - Educational Use Permitted.