Help|Log In|Register|
Home PageMindat NewsThe Mindat ManualHistory of MindatCopyright StatusManagement TeamContact UsAdvertise on Mindat
Donate to MindatSponsor a PageSponsored PagesTop Available PagesMindat AdvertisersAdvertise on MindatThe Mindat Store
Minerals by PropertiesMinerals by ChemistryRandom MineralSearch by minIDLocalities Near MeSearch GlossaryMore Search Options
Search For:
Mineral Name:
Locality Name:
The Mindat ManualAdd a New PhotoRate PhotosLocality Edit ReportCoordinate Completion ReportAdd Glossary Item
StatisticsThe ElementsMember ListBooks & MagazinesMineral Shows & EventsThe Mindat DirectoryHow to Link to MindatDevice Settings
Photo SearchPhoto GalleriesNew Photos TodayNew Photos YesterdayMembers' Photo GalleriesPast Photo of the Day Gallery
Zircophyllite - Água de Pau volcano, San Miguel Island, Azores District, Portugal
April 12, 2012 01:55AM
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
That's because the identity has been questioned; might not have quite enough zirconium to be that species.
and (Ti+Zr) ?
A Ti rich zircophyllite...

Hi Pedro,
analysis (by Roma University) are current...
Ciao. Marco
Ciao Marco,
grazie per le informazzioni.

avatar Re: Zircophyllite - Água de Pau volcano, San Miguel Island, Azores District, Portugal
April 12, 2012 10:16PM
Pedro Alves Wrote:
> Hi,
> and (Ti+Zr) ?
> A Ti rich zircophyllite...

Rather it is Zr-bearing astrophyllite.winking smiley
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).

avatar Re: Zircophyllite - Água de Pau volcano, San Miguel Island, Azores District, Portugal
April 13, 2012 12:07AM
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.
Two problems then.
First the Mn content, wich is probably more conclusive. The Zr is not the 'big problem'.
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.

Your Email:


  • Valid attachments: jpg, gif, png, pdf
  • No file can be larger than 1000 KB
  • 3 more file(s) can be attached to this message

Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically. If the code is hard to read, then just try to guess it right. If you enter the wrong code, a new image is created and you get another chance to enter it right.

Mineral and/or Locality is an outreach project of the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
Copyright © and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2016, except where stated. relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us Current server date and time: October 20, 2016 20:29:16
Go to top of page