2008 Glossary - new nomenclature

I just picked up my 2008 Glossary today and after a few minutes of looking at the mineral groups section in the back, which was restored in this issue (~80 pages), I have noted a number of nomenclature changes which appear to be in the pipeline.
For example for the apatite group:
Fluorapatite is now apatite-(CaF)
Chlorapatite is now apatite-(CaCl)
Clinohydroxylapatite is now apatite-(CaOH)-M
Carbonate-fluoraptite and carbonate-hydroxylapatite are no longer a valid species
etc, etc.
Axinite group:
Ferro-axinite is axinite-(Fe)
Manganaxinite is axinite-(Mn)
etc, etc.
Apophyllite group:
Fluorapophyllite is now apophyllite-(KF)
Hydroxylapapophyllite is apophyllite-(KOH)
etc.etc.

I am sure in due course all these changes and the rationale for making them will be published. I am really looking forward to changing my labels.
Laszlo

Laszlo, I don't believe your last sentence!

Naturally this will cause some initial confusion and extra work, but in the long run we'll all be better off. In future it won't even be necessary to have separate sections for groups, since group members will automatically stay together on alphabetical lists.

Having previously spent several years grumbling about inconsistencies in the naming of minerals, and in defining the boundaries between species, I now heartily applaud the IMA for taking this step towards logic and consistency. I think we will get used to it quite easily!

Alfredo

I look forward to seeing the new Glossary, even if your information on the new nomenclature used makes me wonder if I might as well skip this issue. Even if I have sympathy with the views of Alfredo, I wonder how such a huge step can be taken without it being reflected also in the official IMA-list of mineral names just released. If the "Glossary" is to be read as the personal view of the author as to what should be the future nomenclature of minerals, the use of the new edition is clearly limited and personally I would rather download and use the official IMA list of mineral names. There are actually many different considerations to be made when such important changes are discussed. The use of mineral names is not only a question of future simplicity, but also a question of how to avoid confusion and misunderstanding also by retaining the historic traceability in Mineralogical litterature and use. I do not know what principles constitute the basis for the new "proposed" nomenclature in the "Glossary" and to what extent it has been put into use ( i.e. for the Amphiboles and Eudialyte-group). IF the chemical suffixes used should reflect the major elements in ALL positions where substitutions could occur, the system will be very confusing (think only about all the minerals where Scandium could substitute for Fe or Al), or if not so, changes for many minerals would have to be introduced when new substituions in I given structure is described. And how to name minerals with elements that can substitute at different positions in the structure? As Laszlo I am looking forward to the formalities and rational behind these changes before buying and using the new editon of the glossary and adopting such changes in nimenclature. Until further notice, I will happily live with my old labels.

I am surprised to hear that the 2008 Glossary already has the changes in mineral nomenclature approved by the CNMNC in 2007. These changes are not yet given in the recent update of the IMA list of minerals because the official CNMNC paper on tidying up mineral nomenclature is to be published in the January-February 2008 issue of the Mineralogical Record. Somebody was apparently very helpful in divulging the changes before their publication ..., thank you!

The examples given by Laszlo Horvath are correct, and they were introduced on the repeated request from the mineral collector's community, apatite being the most cited example: without chemical analysis it is impossible to identify the different members of the group; now all specimens can be named 'apatite', the suffix is to be added if chemical data become available. It is the same nomenclature system as already used in the zeolite, labuntsovite, epidote and arrojadite groups. It is the aim of the IMA-CNMNC to use more frequently the suffix-based nomenclature in the future.

As announced before, the paper in Mineralogical Record will also correct some other items, as superfluous hyphens, two-word names and diacritical marks.
Lots of work to change labels, indeed!

Can someone remind me why we have some new names formatted as in

Heulandite-K

and some as

Epidote-(Pb)


Shouldn't they all be similarly formatted?

Jolyon

I think that the forma as -K (without parenthesis) is only for the families of microporous minerals ("molecular sieves" that have the ability to selectively sort molecules based primarily on a size exclusion process (i.e. zeolites).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/06/2008 12:29PM by Marco E. Ciriotti.

As mentioned, I have not seen the new "Glossary" and will probably have no problems with the changes if they are limited to the mineral groups mentioned. I look forward to the article in the Mineralogical record also to see to what extent these new principles will be used for other mineral groups in the future. There are actually many minerals which cannot be identified properly without a chemical analysis with very distinct and widely used names where a similar change in nomenclature will create more of the "Hancockite to Epidote-Pb" problem rather than just changing a prefix to a suffix as for the apatites.

Speaking of consistency, can someone tell me if harmotome, in the phillipsite series of harmotome, phillipsite-Ca, phillipsite-K, and phillipsite-Na, get renamed, to phillipsite-Ba? If yes, then there is a consistent message from the IMA, if not, well, then the whole rational of renaming minerals for consistency needs to be reexamined. If I remember, the zeolite committee did not change harmotome out of respect for historical precedence.

There is no nomenclature article in the January-February 2008 Mineralogical Record. It contains an article on benitoite and the abstracts for the FM papers given at Tucson.

Wendell Wilson e-mailed me on 6 Ocober 2007 that the paper on tidying up mineral nomenclature was scheduled for the January-February 2008 issue of the Mineralogical Record. Apparently something unexpected came up, and the data of the manuscript were already applied in the new Glossary edition ...

Regarding the question of suffixes with and without parentheses:
Suffixes to mineral names have to be added with hyphen and parentheses, with the exception of extra-framework cations as in the zeolites and labuntsovites.

Thanks Marco and Ernst. I knew there was a reason, I just couldn't remember why.

Jolyon

The changes were more surprising than upsetting as I have no arguments in favour or against the changes. Since the Glossary was coming out now for the Tucson show, Joe Mandarino & Malcolm Back obviously wanted to include these coming changes in this edition rather than waiting for the next one in four years time. By the way, a lot of good work has gone into the revived and much revised Mineral groups section.
Laszlo

Ernst,
Can we assume that the article will also be posted on the IMA website?

Jim, and others,

I just heard from Wendell Wilson that the paper will be in the March-April issue of Mineralogical Record. After publication, the data will presumably also be available on the CNMNC website.

Malcolm Back and the late Joe Mandarino used the confidential CNMNC data to prepare their 10th edition of Fleischer's Glossary. Joe Mandarino had official access to these data. In view of the comments given by Joe on the proposed nomenclature data, however, I doubt that the entries in the Glossary about the proposed changes will all be the same as the ones that have been approved by the CNMNC and will appear in the Mineralogical Record. It is really sad that we will have contrasting data on the same subjects.

Thanks, Ernst.
Knowing Joe, the comments would be interesting reading.

Can anyone list other mineral names that have changed to add to those Laszlo has given us. I've ordered my Glossary but would like some advance notice of what to expect.

With Ernst clearly upset by the Glossary stealing the thunder of the CNMNC, is there a case for the Glossary becoming the official CNMNC nomenclature document in future editions?

What chance Ernst and Malcolm sitting round a table to thrash it out?

Andy

>>With Ernst clearly upset by the Glossary stealing the thunder of the CNMNC, >>is there a case for the Glossary becoming the official CNMNC nomenclature >>document in future editions?



The official IMA list already exists: [www.geo.vu.nl]

Now the cat is out of bag, so to speak, with the 2008 Glossary available, should we not make these changes on mindat.org?

I'd prefer if we could get a copy of the official list rather than use the glossary if possible, but I guess it's no big deal to enter the changes as listed in the glossary now and update as necessary when the MinRec article finally comes out.

Jolyon

Will the present names still be searchable, on Mindat, once changed?

Bill G

Yes, so if you enter 'Fluorapatite', it will redirect you to the 'Apatite-(CaF)' page. It will do this automatically if you add new photos and enter 'Fluorapatite' as the mineral type, for example.

Jolyon

>>With Ernst clearly upset by the Glossary stealing the thunder of the CNMNC, >>is there a case for the Glossary becoming the official CNMNC nomenclature >>document in future editions?

The official IMA list already exists: [www.geo.vu.nl]

Marco - you miss my point. The IMA list is now out of date, The Glossary is the most up to date list and in April the Mineralogical Record will update that. The point I was making is that it would be better for the mineralogical community if the Glossary and the official IMA list were one and the same. Why not an IMA sanctioned Glossary in book form printed every four years (or so) and interim listings to keep things up to date as digital files, much as we have now. For the next four years I am going to have to use my Glossary thinking all the time "is this name an IMA approved name"...... unless someone is able to produce a listing of differences !

Andy,

I am sure this discrepancy will not exist for long and the IMA list will be updated.

The problem is the silly restriction on data being released until it is published in a journal.

I say, once the decision is made, put the list online immediately. Why does the science have to wait for the arbitrary date of publication decided by a magazine editor - it doesn't have to be like this any more.

Jolyon

Jolyon,
The Glossary is not the official publication and I think it makes more sense to wait until the official list is published. Then you won't have to review each entry to make the corrections.

Re: publication - I agree. Wendell could publish it via Axis, but we'll probably have to wait until the March-April issue.

I agree with the Jim point of view.

I think my point is this decision should NOT be a decision made by Wendell or any other editor. Once the information has been agreed by the IMA, they should make sure it is published without delay.

Jolyon

Ok, compromise solution:

we will add new names as synonyms of the existing name for now, and switch these round once the paper is published.

I've added Apatite-(CaF) as a synonym of Fluorapatite as an example of this.

Jolyon

It looks like they tried to publish it as soon as possible - for January 2008 - but it fell through.

I agree it COULD be posted on the IMA website prior to publication, but the general feeling (in most scientific literature) seems to be that it doesn't count until a hardcopy publication.

Well I'm not sure I agree with you there Jim.

The "general feeling" is now changing rapidly and many journals are now publishing online in advance of the hardcopy publication, so as not to hold up papers ready for publication in an interminable queue.

In spite of all the technical advances of online submission, electronic sending and refereeing, it seems printing is now the rate-limiting step.

Chris S

That's true, Chris, my comment was in regard to a straight online only publication. Most (if not all) advance online journal publications reflect the look and feel of the hardcopy journal, as opposed to a strict online publication.

The IMA Mineral List is a straight online publication, but Andy considers it out of date, even though it has had versions uploaded in April 2007, September 2007, and January 2008. That's a lot more current than the Glossary.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/09/2008 02:59AM by Jim Ferraiolo.

Have the names of the Roselite group been rationalised in this roundup?

Jolyon

Jolyon,
No changes in the Glossary for the Roselite group.
Laszlo

Jolyon - now that you have downgraded fluorapatite to a synonym of apatite-(CaF) you might want to change the wording used in the Apatite Supergroup too? ........and incidently - why is Spain the only locality listed for the supergroup??

Dear all,

I have been away from my computer for a few days, and only now I see the avalache of comments on the Glossary and the IMA list.

Sadly, as said before, I regret that the IMA list (edited and updated by Ernest Nickel) and the Glossary (edited andf updated by Malcolm Back and Joe Mandarino) do not have the same contents. The Glossary is NOT an IMA-CNMNC publication, the data in it are the personal opinion of the authors.

On the speed of publication: the recent list of changes approved by the IMA-CNMNC was to be published in the Jan-Feb issue of MinRec. A paper publication was necessary because Joe Mandarino published (again on his own initiative, without consulting the IMA-CNMNC) in MinRec 2007 a list of mineral names with diacritical marks. Joe was aware at that time that the CNMNC was preparing a similar list, and he had access to these data. Neverthless, he preferred to go his own way, and regrettably his list differs in many places from the IMA-CNMNC data. This can be compared when the IMA list is published in the Mar-Apr MinRec issue.
Many persons asked in the fall of 2007 for a preprint of this IMA list, but on advice and wishes of Wendell Wilson, it was decided not to had out the data, not even on the CNMNC website. I am not aware of the reasons of MinRec to publish the Glossary already in January, but the IMA-CNMNC data in Mar-Apr.

The recent edition of the Glossary also contains Joe's list of mineral groups and their names. Also the IMA-CNMNC is preparing such a list of groups and their contents (which minerals in which group?).
I have no problem with the fact that the group lists will also be different, as grouping minerals (= classification) is the personal expression of the personal opinion of an author on the mineral kingdom. We know so many classifications (e.g., alphabetical, e.g., the structural one of Lima de Faria, e.g., the chemical-structurtal one of Strunz and Nickel, etc., etc.). The problem is of course quite important for mineral collectors: which classification will they follow: Dana, Strunz or Mandarino? Make your choice and classify ...
Things are different with diacritical marks, etc.: I know that there are many different ways to write mineral names, but only the IMA-CNMNC way is the correct one.

Some of you are suggesting that Malcolm and I should get together to straighten out the differences: Malcolm is of course free to follow the IMA list of mineral names, there are regular updates evryb few months. I have not yet a copy of the new Glossary, but I trust that many MinDat contributors will point out the differences between Glossary and IMA list. Four years ago, Peter Bayliss wrote a rather strong review in the Canadian Mineralogist about the 9th edition of the Glossary. Apparently, it did not entice the authors of the 10th edition to be more careful.

Ernst,

Can I safely assume that since the Procedures and Guidelines "require" that any changes to mineral nomenclature be published in a journal, the Commission is having it printed in Mineralogical Record prior to posting to the IMA website?

However, wouldn't it make more sense to post the nomenclature changes to the IMA website?

Jim,

The current 1998 IMA-CNMNC rules predate largely the electronic era of journals.
If a journal accepts to print reports or decisions of the CNMNC, and if it does not have itself an electronic preprint, then it is a matter of courtesy towards the journal to wait with putting the same data on the CNMNC website until the paper version is available. Even then, the jornal should give permission to put the data on the website. Perhaps not so much a matter of courtesy as of copyright!

This is true, Ernst.

But the question is why publish in a 'papercopy' journal, with all the 'courtesy and copyright' when you can post it article directly on the IMA website and avoid all that?

Out of curiosity, is this the official list everyone is seeking?

'http://www.geo.vu.nl/users/ima-cnmmn/'

The Commission on New Minerals and Mineral Names (CNMMN) was established in 1959 for the purpose of controlling the introduction of new minerals and mineral names, and of rationalising mineral nomenclature. Since that time, the work of the CNMMN has gained overwhelming support from the international mineralogical community. Please consult a review of the Commission activities, and an official IMA-CNMNC List of Mineral Names (version January 2008).

Keith

Yes you would expect the IMA Jan 08 version to be the most up to date listing and technically it still is. However the 2008 Glossary of Mineral Species (that had inside information) effectively makes the current IMA list out of date. Ernst has suggested the IMA listing due for publication in Mineralogical Record will be different again. For the time being the most up to date listing is unavailable to the mineralogical community.

Puzzle this - the new IMA listing was due for publication in the Jan 08 issue of Mineralogical Record. In Feb 08 Mineralogical Record published the Glossary. In April 08 Mineralogical Record will publish the new IMA listing. Mineralogical Record (according to Ernst above) have advised the IMA not to publish an on line version of the listing...........and yet the IMA is custodian of mineral names... The Commission on New Minerals and Mineral Names (CNMMN) was established in 1959 for the purpose of controlling the introduction of new minerals and mineral names

Please Ernst, can we have the listing on line? There will be no negative effect on Mineralogical Record if you do this. Its a wonderful publication.

Smack's of money getting in the way of science, very unhealthy.

Why not publish on the IMA site? With a paper copy, you have a permanent record of what has happened (at least there is a good chance that a copy will survive somewhere - as long as anyone cares about it). With electronic copies, there is always a chance that someone will "improve" a listing and you can never be sure that it is what was originally posted (I know there are things like digital signatures that can handle this). Then there is the problem of what if someone at the University of Amsterdam decides that these documents are no longer relevent. They can go into the ether of the internet and you may or may not be able to retrieve them. There is also the problem of permanence of media (and probably more important the preservation of hardware and software to read all of this). There are still phonograph record players being made, but how many edison cylinder players are out there (and they aren't making them new).

And for those of you that say these things can't or won't happen, March 14th.

"For the time being the most up to date listing is unavailable to the mineralogical community."

Are we not in a bit of a hurry to update all our databases and labels? 14 March is not that far away!

David, you are right: as already the Romans said about 2000 years ago: "Scripta manent, verba volant", or in plain English: what is written will stay, words evaporate. Or in our age: bits and bytes will be lost some day, who has nowadays still a diskette station on his computer, and when did we have these, only 100 years ago, or so?

The IMA provides regularly, every few months, electronic updates of its list of mineral names and formulae. The persons demanding even more frequent updates seem to be very happy with a new Fleischer Glossary every four years, and then only in print of course ...

But as explained earlier in this discussion, the current delay of an IMA publication happened in Tucson, not in Amsterdam.

I have read the messages regarding the Glossary 2008 and the IMA lists, and I have contacted Ernst Burke and explained to him from my standpoint the timing of his article and the new glossary. I was also distressed to learn that the glossary came out before Ernst's article. That was not my understanding while I was updating the glossary.

In the preface to the new addition it is stated that Ernst's article and the Sept 2007 IMA list were used to determine the validity of mineral names. We did not go off on our own tangent with respect to mineral names and that includes spelling.

As always I am sure there will be corrections to be made (in fact I have already found a few myself, and been notified of a couple more), and I am always glad to receive this information. I hope to be able to do updates on a yearly or as needed basis,

Malcolm Back

For natro-uranospinite, does it have a hard hyphen in the name? Unfortunately in the Min Rec article, it is split between two lines and isn't explicitly stated to contain a hyphen like the end of the section on superfluous hyphens.

No hyphen in the name!

Thanks for the information.

Here is a supplement to the IMA-list - Keith A. Peregríne:
IMA, alfabetisk, se: [www.miner.ch]
Google, søg: IMA 2005-001
IMA alle mineraler behandlet siden 1959: www.geo.vu.n/users/ima-cnmmn/
www.geo.vu.nl/~ima-cnmmn/MINERALlist.pdf

2007
1 Lakebogait
4 Grandviewit
5 Lasalit
7 A Surkhobit
9 Montetrisait
11 Meridianiit
12 Munakatait
15 Kalium-aluminotaramit
16 Jahnsit-(NaFeMg)
17 Eirikit
18 Tanohatait
21 Boromullit
23 Voronkovit
29 Hexamolybdenum
32 Niveolanait
37 Horomanit
38 Samaniit
56 Xieit

2006
1 Parageorgbokiit
2 Yakovenchukit-(Y)
3 Andreyivanovit(= K-kentbrooksit
4 Chopinit (ikke komponisten, men mineralog Chopin
5 Hundholmenite-(Y),
6 D Pradetit
7 Chesnokovit
8 Zinclipscombit
9 Sanromanit
10 Fluorcalciobritholit
11 Fluorophlogopit
12 Malyshevit
13 Miessiit, Lapland, Finland
14 Ottensit
15 Marruciit
16 Arsenovanmeerscheit
17 Attikait
18 Arsenovanmeerscheit
19 a Cassagnait
20 Alloriit
21 Nechelyustovit (1 M, 2 M)
22 Uedait-(Ce),
23 Aluminotaramit
24 Alumino-magnesiotaramit
25 Fluoro-alumino-magnesiotaramit
26 Poldervaartit-(Mn)
27 Bortnikovit
28 Guimaräesit
29 Footemineit
30 Calvertit
31 Britvinit, LÃ¥ngban
32 Ferroskutterudit
33 Podlesnoit
34 Demartinit
35 Dmitryivanovit
36 Jadarit
37 Faizievit
38 Nalivkinit
39 Ferromerillit
40 Barioperovskit
41 Gillardit
42 Knasibfit
43 Hephaistosit
44 Direnzoit
45 Zhangpeishanit
46 Haydeeit
47 Zinkolivenit
49 Osakait
51 Barahonait-(Al)
52 Barahonait-(Fe)
53 Selenopolybasit
54 Batisivit
55 Epidot-(Sr) (analog clinozoisit-(Sr) (“niigatait�)
66 Aqualit

2005
2 Fluor-magnesiohastingsit
3 Chistyakovait
4 Coirait
5 A Marianoit
5 D Arrojadit-(KFe)
6 Fluoro-kaliumhastingsit
7 Kalium-chlorhastingsit
8 Piergorit-(Ce)
9 Kapellasit
10 Scorpionit
11 Matioliit
13 Joosterit
14 Ottensit
15 a Karchevskyit
16 Pumpellyit-(Al)
17 Rudashevskyit
18 Poppiit
19 Dualit
20 Paratooit-(La)
21 a Mangazeit
22 Phosphoinnelit
23 Menezesit
26 Phosphohedyphan
28 Middendorfit
29 Gjerdingenit-Ca (= Vuoriyarvit-K)
30 Gjerdingenit-Na
31 Karyochroit
32 Redgillit
32 A: Arrojadit-(SrFe)
33 Sugakiit
34 a Pittongit
35 Armbrusterit
37 Ardennit-(V)
39 Chukanovit i meteorit
40 Stornesit-(Y)
42 Bouazzerit
43 Uramarsit
44 Maghrebit
45 Vavrinit
46 a Avdoninit
47 Arrojadit-(KNa)
48 A: Dickinsonit-(KMnNa)
49 Pattersonit
50 Numanoit
51 Tassieit
52 a Luobusait (= ej Ruobusait)
54 Hydroxylborit
55 Pertlikit
56 Arrojadit-(PbFe)
58A: Fluorarrojadit-(BaNa)
61a Ruifrancoit

2004:
1 Samarskit-(Yb)
2 Fluor-natrium-pedrizit, ex Klinoholmquistit
3 Mazzeltiit
4 Hingganit-(Ce)
5 Pautovit
6 Klinohydroxylapatit
7 Naldrettit
8 Tsepinit-(Sr)
9 Hydroxywagnerit
10 Seifertit
11 Kokchetavit
12 Sokolovait
13 Oxykinoshitalit
14 Stavelotit-(La)
15 Vanadoandrosit-(Ce)
16
17 Senekevichit
18 Terlinguacreekit
19 Qaqarssukit-(Ce)
20 Ungavait
21 Pakhomovskyit
22 Sreinit
23 Chukhrovit-(Nd)
24 Kyrgystanit eller Putzit
25 Allochalcoselit
26 Johnsenit-(Ce)
27 b Kalium-magnesiohastingsit
28 Challacolloit
29 Francoisit-(Ce)
30 amfibol
31 Jonassonit
32 Mutnovskit
33 Wilhelmramsayit
34 Ferriwinchit
35 Waterhouseit
36 Juangodoyit
37 Kochsandorit
38 Slavkovit
39 Golyshevit
40 Mogovidit
41 Atencioit
42 Diversilit
42 a Sazhinit-(La)
43 Farneseit
44 Scheuchzerit
45 Parvo-manganotremolit
46 Nielsenit
47 Kalungait
49 Aspidolit
50 Allanpringit
51 Akdalait
52 Chivruait
53 krivovichevit
54 Lingunit
61 Larisait
63 Ankinovichit
65 Labyrinthit ?
67 Raslakit

2003
1 Heulandit-Ba
2 Bario-Olgit
3 Lepkhenelmit-Zn
3 B “Spodiosit� = fluorapatit, calcit og serpentin.
3 C Magniotriplit = Wagnerit
4 Tarkianit
5 Hillit
6 Zoltaiit
7 Dissaleisit-(La)
8 Paratsepinit-(Na)
9 Holfertit
10 Zincolibethenit
11 Kudriavit
12 Jacquesdietrichit
13 Georgbarsanovit
14 Hapkeit
15 Gjerdingenit-Mn
16 Vasilyevit
17 Maoniupingit-(Ce)
18 Kapustinit
19 Rogermitchellit
20 Catamarcait
21 Guanacoit
22 Pezzottait
24 Grenmarit
25 Coutinhoit
26 Schlemait
27 Vurroit
28 HÃ¥leniusit-(La)
29 Lindbergit
30 Agardit-(Ce)
31 a Plumboagardit
32 Lafossait
33 Yazganit
34 Zeravshanit
35 Pekovit
36 Tokyoit
37 Birait-(Ce)
38
39 Museumit
40 Alpersit
41 Herbertsmithit
42 Cadmoindit
43 Kaliumarfvedsonit
44 Bykovait
45 a Oftedalit
46 Arapovit
47 Holstamit
48 Struvit-K
49 Skaergardit
50 Fluorpargasit
51 Schlegelit
52 Eyselit
53 Iwashiroit-(Y)
55 Vanadiocarpholit
56 Milotait
57 Fougerit
58 Mazzit-(Na)
59 Elsmoreit
60 Rudenkoit
61 Dellaventurait
62 Parvo-mangano-edenit
63 Ferrorosemaryit
64 Angelait
65 Allanit-(La)
66 Parvowinchit

2002 – se IMAhistory

1 Graulichit-(Ce)
2 Trattnerit
3 Alsakharovit-Zn
4 Cobaltkieserit
5 Tsepinit-(K)
6 Paratsepinit-Ba
8 Catalanoit
9a Makarochkinit
12 Kochit
13 Kuannersuit-(Ce)
14 Spriggit
15 Klinobarylit-10
16 manganilvait
17 Ansermetit
18 Magnesiotantalit
19 Kukharenkoit-(La)
20 Tsepinit-(Na)
21 Marinellit
22 Aurivilliusit
23 Percleveit-(Ce)
24 Putzit
25 Västmanlandit-(Ce)
26 Lalondeit
27 Maleevit
28 Ferrosaponit
29 Manganokukisvumit
30 Pertsevit
31 Moskvinit-(Y)
32a Novodneprit
33 Paravinogradovit
34 Dobrècit
35 Nevadait
36 Niksergievit
37 “Surkhobit� er Jinshajiagit 1981-061
38 Alumino-magnesio-hulsit
39 Artsmithit
41 Prewittit
43 Diversilit-(Ce)
47 Zincospiroffit
49 Manganiandrosit-(Ce)
50 Meniaylovit
51 Kalium-magnesio-sadanagait = IMA 82-12 Magnesio-sadanagait
52 Filatovit
53 Gabrielit
54 Kozoit-(La)
55 Taseqit
56 Carbokentbrooksit
57 Zirsilit-(Ce)
58 Cupromakovickyit
59 Petewilliamsit
60 Jaquéit
61 Larisait
62 Rouxelit
63 Ankinovichit
64 Kaliumkarpholit
65 Labyrinthit
66 Aqualit
67 Raslakit
xx Neskevaarit-(Fe)

2001
1 Monazit-(Sm)
2 Pizgrischit
3b Gengenbachit
4 Calciopetersit
5 Verbeekit
6 Organovait-Zn
7 Parakuzmenkoit-Fe
8 Megakalcilit
9 Gjerdingenit-Fe
10 Tillmannsit
12 Telyushenkoit
13 Reidit
14 Tweddillit
15 Emilit
16 Salzburgit
17 Kupcikit
18 Lanmuchangit
20 Mottanait-(Ce)
21 Ciprianiit
22 Calderonit
23 A Eveslogit
24 Cavoit
26 Mangan-lotharmeyerit
27 Descrespignyit-(Y)
28 Karupmøllerit-Ca
29 Hoganit
30 Paceit
31 Bushmakinit
32 Ferripedrizit
33 Pellouxit
34 Gramaccioliit-(Y)
35 Tedhadleyit
36 Kaliumchloropargasit
37 Kuzmenkoit-Zn
38 Gutkovait-Mn
39 Nikischerit
40 Orthominasragrit
41 Bobtraillit
42 Cerit-(La)
44 Greifensteinit
45 Shirozulit
48 Ferrohögbomit-2N2S, tidl. Högbomit-8H
49 Kalium-leakeit
51 Walkerit
52 Cobaltarthurit
53 Keilit
54 Sewardit
55 Niigatait
56 Marécottit
57 Vitimit
58 Goldquarryit
59 Martinit
60 Nabalamprophyllit
61 Tischendorfit
62 Phospho-walpurgit
63 Shirokshinit
64 Glagolevit
65 Protoanthophyllit
66 Ferri-klinoferroholmquistit
67 A Ferri-ottoliniit
69 Ferri-whittakerit
70 Tuit

2000
A Paralabuntsovit-Mg
D Orthojoaquinit-(La)
F Hellandit-(Ce)
1
2 Bradaczekit
3 Kampfit
4 Riomarinait
5 Sailaufit
6 Dashkovait
7 Turtmannit
8 Lisitsynit-(Y)
9 Malinkoit
10 Ikranit
11 Calcio-andyrobertsit
12 Cobaltneustädtelit
13 Borocookeit
14 Laflammeit
15 Ferronordit-(La)
17 Feklichevit
18 Orthominasragit
19 Pseudojohannit
20 Mottanait-(Ce)
21 Buryatit
23 Fencooperit
24 Nabesit
25 Thomsonit-(Sr)
27 Matsubarait
28 Rastsvetaevit
29 Bobkingit
30
31 Organovait-(Mn)
32 Cattiit
33 Ganterit
34 Oswaldpeetersit
35 Bussenit
36 Rinmanit
37 Fluorvesuvianit
38 Allabogdanit
39 Novgorodovait
40 Manganvesuvianit
41 Ferriallonit-(Fe)
42 Woodallit
43 a Krieselit (Ge-topaz)
44 Salzburgit
45 A Bobjonesit
46 Tsepinit-Na
47 Dickthomssenit
48 Chlorbartonit
49 Fluoro-Edenit
50 Burnsit
51 Kristiansenit
52 Santabarbarit

1999

2 Tegengrenit
3 Clearcreckit
4a Rheniit
5 Bakhchisaraitsevit
6 Remondit-(La)
7 Svenekit
8 Nickellotharmeyerit
9 Johntomait
10 Rouait
11 Tamait
12 Cerchiarait
13 Florenskyit
14 Londonit
15 Bigcreekit
16 Henrymeyerit
17 Litvinskit
18 Cronusit
19 a Biehlit
20 Adamsit-(Y)
21 Dukeit
22 Juanitait
23 Brodtkorbit
24 Chromseladonit
25 Ominellit
26 Ferrokinoshitalith-1M
27 Schneebergit
28 Nickelschneebergit
29 Cobalttsumcorit
30 Lukrahnit
31 Manganonaujakasit
32 Niobokupletskit
33 Micheelsenit
34 Petterdit
35 Moganit
36 Ercitit
37 Lemanskiit
39 Gmelinit-(K)
40 Chabasit-(Sr)
41 Tumchait
42 Felbertalit
43 Paganoit
45 Cejkait
46 Ferrokentbrooksit
47 Pararsenolamprit
48 Fluorannit
49 Baumstarkit
50 Vanadiumdravit
51 Schiavinatoit

1998

1 Rollandit
2 Carrarait
3 a Bleasdaleit
4 Marumoit
6 Serrabrancait
7 Bederit
9 Vergasovait
10 Silvialit
11 Gladiusit
12 Theoparacelsit
13 Khaidarkanit
14 Zinkgartrellit
15 Rappoldit
16 Neustädtelit
17 Brandholzit
18 Fluornatromicrolit
19 Korobitsynit
23 Nickelphosphid
24 Ekatit
25 Esperanzait
26 Zincowoodwardit 3R
26 a Zincowoodwardit 1T
27 Khmaralit
28 Ferrotitanowodginit
29 Polyakovit-(Ce)
30 Formicait
31 Vajdakit
32 Leogangit
33 Zincalstibit
34 Itoigawait
35 Symesit
36 Sidpietersit
37 Magnesiofoitit
38 Orlandiit
39 Lulzacit
42 Khomyakovit
43 Manganokhomyakovit
44 Krettnichit
45 Moêloit = Moeloit
46 Obertiit
47 Bariosincosit
48 Springcreekit
49 Xenotim-(Yb)
50 Labuntsovit-(Mg)
51 Labuntsovit-(Fe)
52 a Lemmleinit-(Ba)
53 a Bendadait
54 Belloit
55 Rengeit
56 Fluoro-Magnesio-Arfvedsonit
57 Kapitsait-(Y)
58 Kuzmenkoit-(Mn)
59 Bismutopyrochlor
60 Mozgovait
61 Natrium-Ferripedrizit
62 Arakiit
63 Kozoit-(Nd)
64 Oneillit
65 Hydroxylklinohumit
66 Gottlobit
67 Urusovit
68
69 Ronneburgit
70 Cleusonit

1997

1 Brendalit
2 Okayamalith
3 Lemmleinit-(K)
4 Cuboargyrit
5 Chadwichit
7 Manganonordit-(Ce)
8 Ferronordit-(Ce)
9 Zálesiit
10 Tsugaruit
12 Cabalzarit
14 Pseudosinhalit
15 Haineaultit
16 Kanonerovit
17 Klinocervantit
18 Shibkovit
19 Zaccagnait
21 Grumiplucit
22 Andyrobertsit
23 Calcio-andyrobertsit-20
24 Niedermayerit
25 Blatonit
26 Wiluit
27 Cobaltlotharmeyerit
28 Palladodymit
29 Miassit
30 Polkanovit
32 Wallkilldellit-(Fe)
33 Kastningit
34 Wilhelmkleinit
35 Kalium-ferrisadanagait
36 Galgenbergit-(Ce)
37 Woolridgeit
38 Batiferrit
40 Brinrobertsit
41 Changoit
42 Pillait
43 Suredait
44 Akimotoit
45 Simmonsit
47 Thomasclarkit-(Y)
48 Schaferit
49 Haigerachit
50 Nabiasit
51 Sicherit

1996
1 Juabit
2 Piretit
3 Walfordit
4 Lesukit
5 Chlorartinit
6 Gordait
7 Kalifersit
8 Stoppaniit
9 Brianroulstonit
10 Graeserit
12 Caoxit
13 Deliensit
14 a Scainit
15 Georgbokiit
16 Nepskoeit
17 Gilmarit
18 Rossmanit
19 Sheldrickit
20 Philolithit
22 Fluorcaphit
23 Kentbrooksit
24 Pretulit
25 Mutinait
26 Kenhsuit
27 Ilinskit
28 Galileiit
29 Boralsilit
30 Rhodarsenid
32 Hovarthit-(Y)
33 Lukechangit-(Ce)
34 Raadeit
35 Phosphogartrellit
36 Turkestanit
37 Phosphovanadylit
38 Hydrowoodwardit
39 Isovit
40 Hiarneit
41 Berezanskit
43 Mallestigit
44 Chrisstanleyit
45 Mereheadit
47 Ferrorhodsit
48 Chloromenit
49 Georgeericksenit
50 Barquillit
51 Parasibirskit
52 Velikit
53 Kuzelit
54 Haggertyit
55 Zugshunstit-(Ce)
56 Coskrenit-(Ce)
57 Levinsonit-(Y)
58 Rubiklin
59 Bamfordit
60 Juonniit
61 Parascorodit
62 Carmichaelit
63 Natrolemoynit
64 Coparsit

1995

1 Benauit
2 Beraunit
2 A Benyacarit
3 Malanit
5 Strontiomelan
6 Laforetit
7 Oenit
9 Sudovikovit
11 Leisingit
12 Yvonit
13 Feinglosit
14 Penobsquisit
15 Ternesit
16 Fianelit
17 Edgarit
18 Ferroseladonit
19 Ferroaluminoseladonit
20 C Jarandolit (burde hedde Srbianit – discussion til 2006)
21 Rosiait
22 Meurigit
23 Belovit-(La)
24 Isolueshit
25 Natroglaukocerinit
26 Terranovait
27 Averievit
28 Rambergit
29 Clerit
30 Christelit
31 Vuoriyaivit
32 Hexaferrum
33 Intersilit
34 Pyatenkoit-(Y)
35 Niobocarbid
36 Deloneit-(Ce)
37 Grattarolait
38 Rodolicoit
39 Utahit
40 Kukharenkoit-(Ce)
41 Damiaoit
42 Yixunit
43 Jedwabit
44 Chrombismit
45 Natrium-ferri-klinoferroholmquistit
46 Jørgensenit
47 Changchengit
48 Pushcharowskit
49 Tatyanait
50 Hechtsbergit
51 Tschörtnerit
52 Chromphyllit
53 Ancylit-(La)
57 Dessauit

1994

1 Yuanfuliit
2 Nchwaningit
3 Crerarit
4 Ungarettiit
5 Bechererit
6 Phosphoellenbergit
7 Nafertisit
8 Lenait
10 Dusmatovit
11 Gwihabait
12 Recderit-(Y)
13 Sabelliit
14 Zlatogorit
16 Zincohögbomit
17 Varennesit
18 Calcioaravaipait
19 Wupatkiit
20 Nezilovit
21 Gallobeudantit
22 Fluorthalenit-(Y)
23 Chengdeit
24 Orthowalpurgit
25 Jáchymovit
26 Studenitsit
30 Babkinit
31 Iltisit
32 Nierit
33 “Sigismundit� = 2005 D: Arrojadit-(BaFe)
34 Magnesiocoulsonit
35 Mahnertit
36 Hanawaltit
38 Quadratit
43 Jensenit
45 Stanekit
46 Kaliumpargasit
47 Sorosit
48 Androsit-(Ca)
49 Koragoit
50 Frankamenit
51 Saddlebackit
52 Odintsovit
53 Natroxalat
54 Gottardiit
55 Wesselsit
56 Fettelit
57 Dessauit
58 Noelbensonit
59 = 2000-049 Fluoroedenit

1993

1 Calcioburbankit
2 Ernienickelit
3 Alarsit
4 Alumioklyuchevskit
5 Strakhovit
6 Tetrarooseveltit
7 Kalifersit
8 Barberiit
9 Sphaerobismoit
10 Chladniit
11 Szenicsit
12 Scandiobabingtonit
13 Karusugit
16 Mayingit
17 Gaotaiit
18 Shuangfengit
19 Pingguit
20 Carlosruizit
21 Fuenzalidait
22 Tuzlait
23 Vlodavetsit
24 Wycheproofit
25 Jentschit
26 Fluoro-ferro-leakeit
27 A Telluronevskit
28 Yuanjiangit
29 Seidit-(Ce)
30 Crawfordit
31 Artroreit
32 Vanadomalayait
33 Fluorocannilloit
34 Gerenit-(Y)
35 Olkhonskit
36 Effenbergerit
37 Selwynit
38 Zajacit-(Ce)
40 Smrkovecit
41 Peterbaylissit
42 Dozyit
44 Brizziit-III og VII
45 Mereiterit
46 Kingstonit
47 Frankhawthorneit
48 Medenbachit
49 Takedait
50 Jankovicit
51 Viaeneit
52 Grossit
53 Shannonit
54 Dzharkenit
55 Altisit
56 Hyttsjöit
57 Menshikovit
58 Shkatulkalit
59 Tungstibit
60 Klinoatacamit
61 Owensit

1992

1. Mahlmoodit
2. Cannonit
3. Antimonselit
5. Seelit
6. Widgiemoolthalit
8. Qilianshanit
10. Pringleit
11 Ruitenbergit
12 Poldervaartit
13 Petitjeanit
14 Nickenichit
15 Mikasait
16 Gatehouseit
17 Morimotoit
18 Paraniit-(Y)
19 Ravatit
20 Fluororichterit
22 Juanitait
24 Kusachiit
25 Mcalpineit
26 Charmarit-2H
27 Charmarit-3T
28 Quintinit-2H
29 Qunitinit-3T
30 Caresit
31 Sazykinait-(Y)
32 Kornit
33 Hennomartinit
34 Foitit
35 Magnesiostaurolit
36 Zincostaurolit
37 Zdenekit
38 Maikainit
39 Ovamboit
40 Gaultit
41 Dorallcharit
42 Baksanit
43 Rabejacit
44 Ternovit
45 Kintoreit
46 Rosenbergit
48 Petersenit-(Ce)
50 Magnesiodumortierit

1991

1 Deanesmithit
3 Bismutocolumbit
5 Guarinoit
7 Reppiait
8 Walthierit
9 Huangit
10 Harrisonit
12 Vistepit
13 Tiettait
14 Ershovit
15 Megacyclit
16 Mozartit
17 Segnitit
18 Trembathit
19 Fetiasit
20 Krasnovit
21 Swaknoit
22 Kosnarit
23 Mccrillisit
24 Coquandit
25 Watanabeit
26 Thérésmagnanit