Hi All

Has anyone familar with the Strunz system checked out the version on-line at the MDAT website? (I don't have the URL, but there's a link to it from the IMA website.)

I'm not all that familiar with the Strunz system, and I'm wondering if the version at MDAT is the same as the one published by Carl Strunz, or has been modified significantly.

If anyone knows, I'd appreciate hearing from you.

Regards

Al Plante

Hi Al,

The version of the Strunz classification that Dr Hoelzel publishes is being updated by him for his MINDAT database.

It is also the same version that is used on the PHOTO ATLAS OF MINERALS by the Gem & Mineral Council of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County.

The version I have on webmineral is from Geolib. I have asked Dr Hoelzel for permission to use his version of Strunz since the one from Geolib is out-of-data and they want to charge me for any new downloads.

Anyway, the next update of webmineral.com will feature MINDAT's Strunz classification.

Now if we can just get Jolyon to update Hey's Chemical Index of Minerals with the new mineral species, we could provide the most up-to-date mineral classification scheme(s) in the world.


Regards,

Dave

Hi All

First, thanks Dave for the info you provided.

Second, I coresponded with someone who is familiar with the actual published editions of Stunz's "Mineralogiche Tabblen." He informs me that Dr. Strunz has never included varietal names in his classification scheme. So apparently Dr. Hoestle, owner of MDAT, has expanded the Strunz classification at his site to include varietys - not just new species.

People should be aware that this is not something Dr. Strunz incorporated in his works.

Regards

Al Plante

Hi Al,

That is interesting. When I merged the Geolib Strunz Tables, they had 3,822 minerals in their files. There were no varieties and, as far as I could see, there were no major variations in mineral names (other than umiats, and accents).

Anyway, the results are shown in both the Strunz and Dana classification tables on webmineral, those minerals without a Strunz id are shown and those minerals without a Dana id are shown. When I do the merge, there will be a mineral by mineral reconciliation of MDAT's data with mine. I will then be in position to determine if MINDAT has corrupted the Strunz classification scheme.

Until then,

Regards,

Dave,

FYI - I did a rough comparison and found that Geolib Strunz and Dana have about 60 groups where there is 100% agreement on minerals in the group. Since Strunz uses a three level classification scheme and Dana uses a 4 level classification scheme, that result is suprising. What I need to do is compare the 3rd level classification in Strunz with the 3rd level in dana and see if there is additional simularites. The Dana classification tends to put minerals with the same structural properities in the same 4th level group whereas Strunz tends to have a coarser grouping with the three levels.