Donate now to keep alive!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 Mindat
What is a mineral?The most common minerals on earthMineral PhotographyThe Elements and their MineralsGeological TimeMineral Evolution
Minerals by PropertiesMinerals by ChemistryAdvanced Locality SearchRandom MineralRandom LocalitySearch by minIDLocalities Near MeSearch ArticlesSearch 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 MuseumsMineral Shows & EventsThe Mindat DirectoryDevice Settings
Photo SearchPhoto GalleriesNew Photos TodayNew Photos YesterdayMembers' Photo GalleriesPast Photo of the Day Gallery

Tirodite from Talcville, NY

Posted by John Betts  
John Betts December 17, 2010 07:03PM
In 1961 a find of an unknown mineral at International Talc Company mine, Talcville, NY was labeled as Tirodite. A specimen of the material is illustrated on Mindat at

Tirodite was identified on Mindat as Parvowinchite based on the assumption that Tirodite was a synonym of Parvowinchite as described in the 1997 paper on amphibole nomenclature.

But a recent email from Mike Hawkins, curator at the NY State Museum mineral collection states, "The material that we have examined from Talcville called tirodite has been shown to be mangano cummingtonite by electron microprobe."

Most likely the renaming of Tirodite as Parvowinchite is correct, but that the material from this locality is actually a different mineral.

This suggests:
1. The photo be corrected on Mindat (
2. The questionable manganocummingtonite listing on the locality page ( be revised to be a valid species.
3. Parvowinchite should be removed from the locaity page (
Jolyon & Katya Ralph December 17, 2010 10:09PM
Seeing as another great amphibole shakeup is imminent, I would wait until that is published before we make any changes.

John Duck December 17, 2010 10:32PM
Just to clarify manganocummingtonite, parvowinchite, and tirodite all refer to the same mineral. See Mindat under parvowinchite and under manganocummingtonite.
Knut Edvard Larsen December 17, 2010 10:42PM
Thanks for spotting this, John.

Since there is already a reference given for parvowinchite at the Talcville locality page, i like to check out this reference first before removing or doing things.
The reference listed is:
George Robinson & Steven Chamberlain (2007) Gazetteer of major New York State mineral localities. Rocks & Minerals, 82, #6, 472-483

I don't have access to this issue. Does it refers to the "tirodite" or is it about another mineral found at the locality ?

Tirodite was identified on Mindat as Parvowinchite based on the assumption that Tirodite was a synonym of Parvowinchite as described in the 1997 paper on amphibole nomenclature

If you refer to Leake (1997) , it is saying that tirodite = manganocummingtonite

Descrption of "tirodite", Segeler (1961) can be read here:
John Duck December 17, 2010 11:42PM

Unfortunately I do not have a copy of the referenced Rocks and Minerals Issue. So I can't be much help there. I have no problem editing the mineral names on my photos, but please edit the site info first so the photos will be consistent. Leake (1997) does state that tirodite = manganocummingtonite. One thing to check though is the reference to IMA 2003 nomenclature changes/species discreditation referenced on and /or Mindat. Were there further nomenclature changes in 2003? Does this mean that the Mindat parvowinchite entry needs to be changed then to manganocummingtonite?
Knut Edvard Larsen December 18, 2010 08:30PM
The IMA new minerals 2003 :
says about IMA 2003-066 = parvowinchite the following:
" Similar amphibole material has been previously described as “tirodite”, but this name was discredited in the 1997 paper on amphibole nomenclature, the new name being “(alkali-bearing) manganocummingtonite”.
(cfr Parvowinchite page : )

If the "similar amphibole materiale" (from Talcville) now is again found to be manganocummingtonite, i really agree with Jolyon that to wait until new nomenclature on the amphibole is published is the absolute best in this case.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/18/2010 08:31PM by Knut Edvard Larsen.
John Duck December 18, 2010 11:39PM
I completely agree.
John Betts December 19, 2010 07:10PM
John Duck Wrote:
> Just to clarify manganocummingtonite,
> parvowinchite, and tirodite all refer to the same
> mineral. See Mindat under parvowinchite and
> under manganocummingtonite.

That is incorrect. Manganocummingtonite and parvowinchite are distinct species.
John Betts December 19, 2010 07:36PM
Since Hawkins at the NY State Museum has confirmed manganocummingtonite, the question mark following the species should be eliminated for the locality (
Uwe Kolitsch December 19, 2010 10:05PM
Olav Revheim March 20, 2012 07:24PM
I'd like to support John Betts on this one because of the following information:

"Segeler (1961) mistakenly referred to the manganoan cummingtonites from Talcville, New York as "tirodite," because the yellow amphibole from Tirodi contains substantial amounts of Mn and Mg. Unfortunately, Segeler's misidentification of manganoan cummingtonite as tirodite received the blessings of the IMA Commission on New Mineral Names. Ross et al. (1969) have recommended that the name tirodite should not be applied to the Talcville specimens, which they prefer to call manganoan cummingtonite." Subrata Ghose, Yang Hexiong (1989): Mn-Mg distribution in a CZ/m manganoan cummingtonite: Crystal-chemical considerations, American Mineralogist, Volume 74, pages 1091-1096, 1989:

Further, Deer, Howie and Zussman (Rock forming minerals, double chain silicates, p96) provides an analysis of "tirodite" from Talcville NY, showing 0,033 apfu Al, and 0.059 apfu Na, thus far from any winchite-series mineral.

The original paper published by Segler in 1961: Segler(1961): FIRST U. S. OCCURRENCE OF MANGANOAN
CUMMINGTONITE, TIRODITE, also contains two analysis' of the "tirodite". None of them contain any Na.

Even if it is possible that the entire winchite-series will be discontinued in the future, cummingtonite will probably not disappear.

I think it is safe to delete parvowinchite from the Talcville locality page.

Calling tirodite a synonym of parowinchite, see tirodite page is also incorrect. Most "tirodites" qualify as Mn-rich cummingtonites or manganocummingtonites in todays nomenclature.

Knut Edvard Larsen March 26, 2012 06:40PM
Commentaries added to the tirodite page, International Talc Company Mine page,
and parvowinchite set as "erronously reported" (with commentaries) on the locality page.

Messages sent for the photos
John Duck April 21, 2012 06:40PM
To solve this dilemma I sent a sample of the specimen to John Attard for analysis. Results of the analysis indicate that the specimen is in fact anthophyllite, not parvowinchite or manganocummingtonite. Accordingly it appears that short of an analysis, identification cannot be made with certainty on this material.

I have updated the two photos under International Talc Company mine (Reynolds mine), Talcville, St. Lawrence Co., New York, USA. Unfortunately one of the updated photos is not appearing for the site. Could someone refresh the page or approve the edits?

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/21/2012 06:46PM by John Duck.
Olav Revheim April 22, 2012 06:04AM

Thanks. According to Segeler(1961), his "tirodite", ie Mn-rich cummingtonite was found as "transparent pink blades embedded in a matrix of fibrous pink anthophyllite". You may have both anthophyllite, cummingtonite and tremolite in the same specimen.


John Duck April 22, 2012 12:35PM

It's possible, but the sample submitted for analysis consisted of semi-transparent pink blades originally embedded in a tremolite matrix. So the "transparent pink blades" may be either anthophyllite or manganocummingtonite, etc.

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

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 1993-2018, except where stated. relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us Current server date and time: January 17, 2018 05:14:35
Go to top of page