Discussions

💬 Home 🔎 Search 📅 Latest

╳Discussions

💬 Home 🔎 Search 📅 Latest

Groups

Recent Images in Discussions

PhotosZircophyllite - Água de Pau volcano, San Miguel Island, Azores District, Portugal

12th Apr 2012 01:55 UTCModris Baum 🌟 Expert

Zircophyllite

Água de Pau Volcano, São Miguel, Azores, Portugal

Something strange going on with this photo.

It's a POTD but it doesn't show up in the zircophyllite gallery, nor in the locality gallery

12th Apr 2012 03:01 UTCAlfredo Petrov Manager

That's because the identity has been questioned; might not have quite enough zirconium to be that species.

12th Apr 2012 13:27 UTCPedro Alves Expert

Hi,

and (Ti+Zr) ?

A Ti rich zircophyllite...

Cheers,

Pedro

12th Apr 2012 14:28 UTCMarco E. Ciriotti Manager

Hi Pedro,

analysis (by Roma University) are current...

Ciao. Marco

12th Apr 2012 20:36 UTCPedro Alves Expert

Ciao Marco,

grazie per le informazzioni.

Saluti,

Pedro

12th Apr 2012 22:16 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager

Pedro Alves Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hi,

> and (Ti+Zr) ?

> A Ti rich zircophyllite...

Rather it is Zr-bearing astrophyllite.;-)

12th Apr 2012 23:38 UTCPedro Alves Expert

Hi Pavel,

your hypothesis seems to be more correct.

Since, in this particular case, we cannot see the F and the Fe content seems to be higher than the Mn one (not sure about that, and not sure also it this may be important).

Cheers,

Pedro

13th Apr 2012 00:07 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager

Real Zircophyllite should be Mn-dominant - it is Zr analogue of kupletskite, not astrophyllite.

what about F content, I am think all is OK with it in this mineral. F contents in such rocks are usually enough high.

13th Apr 2012 00:22 UTCPedro Alves Expert

Two problems then.

First the Mn content, wich is probably more conclusive. The Zr is not the 'big problem'.

Right?

24th Apr 2012 12:57 UTCLuigi Chiappino Expert

Dear All,

I really appreciate this stimulating discussion, however, I feel the need to remind to you (as it

has been explained to me) that from qualitative EDS analysis it is not, and I repeat, it is not

possible to estimate accurately the relative abundances of the elements. Consequently,

every assignment must be considerd a mere and often a meaningless, speculation.

On the contrary, the attribution was based also on preliminary x-ray diffraction data, that are

probably a better method of identification than the "eye" of an experienced amateur or even a

professor in mineralogy.

Finally, I may be wrong, but there are many groups of minerals (e.g. H, B, Be,

REE and Li bearing minerals), in which also routinary structural and quantitative chemical

analyses, can not be far from sufficient to properly define a species.

Go to top of page