Log InRegister
Quick Links : The Mindat ManualThe Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryMindat Newsletter [Free Download]
Home PageAbout MindatThe Mindat ManualHistory of MindatCopyright StatusWho We AreContact UsAdvertise on Mindat
Donate to MindatCorporate SponsorshipSponsor a PageSponsored PagesMindat AdvertisersAdvertise on Mindat
Learning CenterWhat is a mineral?The most common minerals on earthInformation for EducatorsMindat ArticlesThe ElementsThe Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryGeologic Time
Minerals by PropertiesMinerals by ChemistryAdvanced Locality SearchRandom MineralRandom LocalitySearch by minIDLocalities Near MeSearch ArticlesSearch GlossaryMore Search Options
Search For:
Mineral Name:
Locality Name:
Keyword(s):
 
The Mindat ManualAdd a New PhotoRate PhotosLocality Edit ReportCoordinate Completion ReportAdd Glossary Item
Mining CompaniesStatisticsUsersMineral MuseumsClubs & OrganizationsMineral Shows & EventsThe Mindat DirectoryDevice SettingsThe Mineral Quiz
Photo SearchPhoto GalleriesSearch by ColorNew Photos TodayNew Photos YesterdayMembers' Photo GalleriesPast Photo of the Day GalleryPhotography

Mineralogical ClassificationNew mineral species approved by IMA CNMNC in August and September 2018

26th Oct 2018 14:30 UTCMarco E. Ciriotti Manager

Attached is the new Newletters.

Attachments

You need to be logged in to view attachments.

27th Oct 2018 02:21 UTCPaul Brandes 🌟 Manager

Thanks for always keeping Mindat and its users updated on new mineral species, Marco!

27th Oct 2018 10:29 UTCJason B. Smith Expert

Before the questions come, I will try and clarify the differences between aniyunwiyaite, fanfaniite and kingsmountite at the Foote Mine. (Perhaps it would be instrumental to post a link to this comment on the pages for all three minerals). Aniyunwiyaite was found all in one boulder, and every sample that was analyzed from that boulder showed the triclinic symmetry, even from several different environments and parageneses. Oddly enough, ‘kingsmountite’ from every other occurrence at the mine that was tested showed the monoclinic cell. If you have received ‘kingsmountite’ from me, it is most likely aniyunwiyaite. This boulder produced the vast majority of the ‘kingsmountite’ I ever collected on the dumps. Aniyunwiyaite also shows slightly steeper terminations and deeper striations as compared to the other two. Fanfaniite should be considered extremely rare, with four verified samples including the type material. Kingsmountite itself is also now quite rare. Any samples in the montgomeryite group from the Foote Mine should be analyzed to assign proper species unless you received them from me, and you can with some confidence label them aniyunwiyaite.

27th Oct 2018 17:09 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager

"(Perhaps it would be instrumental to post a link to this comment on the pages for all three minerals)."


Done.

27th Oct 2018 18:49 UTCJason B. Smith Expert

Thank you Uwe.


Also, I think it’s redundant to add ‘east dump’ as a second locality. It is just a designation to delineate between the two main dumps, but all the material came from the main open pit originally.

28th Oct 2018 17:29 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager

Did the two dumps exist and were filled up contemporaneously or was one dump started after the first was "full"?

28th Oct 2018 19:53 UTCJason B. Smith Expert

The ‘east dump’ is primarily oxidation zone material that was dumped between 1955 and the early 1980s, but other material was added as space was needed. The north dump (which since 2015 is now covered by a park) was primarily low grade spodumene pegmatite and albitite tertiary gangue, but oxidized zone material was also added as it was encountered. Nearly all of the oxidation zone phosphates were collected on the ‘east dump’, including the type earlshannonite, kingsmountite, mangangordonite, ferraioloite, footemineite, kayrobertsonite, etc, but many of these minerals can be found along the outside rim of the inactive pit in oxidized pegmatite, which is why adding a second locality is redundant. This was a very large open-pit operation, and there are many other smaller dumps in addition to the main two mentioned here. The reason so many type species were found on the east dump is only because it was readily accessible and had the highest concentration of oxidized material. Lithiomarsturite, tetrawickmanite and other species were originally collected on the ‘north dump’. I don’t see that it is necessary to add separate localities for any of these as all the material has the same source.

29th Oct 2018 22:07 UTCŁukasz Kruszewski Expert

I am also very thankful to Marco! No informations from AMI wouldn't make possible to add these newbies to mindat.

11th Nov 2018 19:55 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager

Fixed.
 
and/or  
Mindat Discussions Facebook Logo Instagram Logo Discord Logo
Mindat.org is an outreach project of the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
Copyright © mindat.org and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2024, except where stated. Most political location boundaries are © OpenStreetMap contributors. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters. Founded in 2000 by Jolyon Ralph.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us / DMCA issues - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: May 10, 2024 13:04:34
Go to top of page