Help mindat.org|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
Minerals by PropertiesMinerals by ChemistryAdvanced Locality SearchRandom MineralSearch 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
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
bannerbannerbannerbannerbannerbanner
avatar
Martin Rich August 04, 2017 10:38PM
Lookes to me as brookite.
avatar
Owen Lewis August 05, 2017 01:53AM
I don't know the locality given but looks good as zircon to me. IMHO not brookite;
- Not bladed, could be tetragonal.
- Termination good for zircon and not good for brookite.
- FWIW not the usual colour for brookite
avatar
Doug Daniels August 05, 2017 02:11AM
I'm assuming this is the same as the Jone Iron District (as defined in New Mex. Bureau of Mines Bull 8), in which case zircon was not described. However, the iron deposit is described as being intruded into a quartz monzonite, so there are some possibilities of various minerals. But, the photo doesn't look like any zircons I've ever seen.
avatar
Scott Braley August 05, 2017 02:25AM
I wondered about this too - I've collected at Jones Camp (same locality?) and didn't see anything like either zircon or brookite.
avatar
Rolf Luetcke August 05, 2017 02:33AM
Hi all,
Wish I could give more information on the piece but I can say, Ron Gibbs, the person I got this from analyzes the material he sells and it came from him.
It seems he found a number of new species for NM over the years he worked there.
Hope this helps a bit.
Rolf
avatar
Reiner Mielke August 05, 2017 11:51AM
Does not look like zircon to me. The vertical striations suggests that it might be some sort of amphibole maybe actinolite.
avatar
Pavel Kartashov August 05, 2017 01:51PM
Of course it can't to be zircon due to symmetry of the crystal and vertical striations. I bet for some amphibole or pyroxene.
avatar
Michael C. Michayluk August 05, 2017 03:07PM
Ron is a well known geologist/collector in the southwest, and it would be out of character for him to sell such a misidentification (although mistakes can happen to anyone). Maybe there is a zircon somewhere else on the specimen?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/05/2017 03:12PM by Michael C. Michayluk.
avatar
Uwe Kolitsch August 05, 2017 04:38PM
Message sent.
avatar
Pavel Kartashov August 05, 2017 04:41PM
Rolf, you may easily to check presence of zircon in the specimen under SW UV.
avatar
Don Saathoff August 05, 2017 04:47PM
Ron gave a presentation at the 32nd annual New Mexico Mineral Symposium, November, 2011 on the geology, history and mineralogy of the Jones Camp District. His research was accompanied by sound identification. Zircon was included in the paragenesis.

I don't think I see striations on the XL but rather possible inclusions and I do see (111) faces on the termination - they're small but present.

We've known Ron for nearly 30 years and have not known him to ever make a statement he couldn't back up with good science....

Don
avatar
Uwe Kolitsch August 05, 2017 06:03PM
Don: could you contact Ron and point him to this thread?
avatar
Rolf Luetcke August 05, 2017 06:23PM
It would be nice if Ron would chime in.
I did look the piece over very well and this is the one good crystal I found on the piece I could even get a photo of. I too had considered it may be somewhere else on the piece but couldn't find anything else what was a good candidate.
I hope Ron will look here and add what he thinks.
Rolf
avatar
Don Saathoff August 05, 2017 06:24PM
Uwe, I can certainly try!

Another point I failed to make earlier is that when stacking is used a certain amount of fore-shortening of the image takes place - as with a long telephoto lens stopped down for maximum depth-of-field. If the tetragonal XL is angled w/ a "b" face barely showing it will appear to be tabular due to the fore-shortening effect.

I will try to get Ron to comment....

Don
avatar
Rolf Luetcke August 05, 2017 06:40PM

Here is another angle of the same crystal.
It is not a tabular crystal and has good terminations. It is not striated, as thought earlier but does have inclusions.
There are quite a few bits and pieces of other crystals in the specimen but this is the only complete crystal I could get a photo of.
Rolf
avatar
Rolf Luetcke August 05, 2017 07:29PM

Here is a different crystal in a pocket, from the side and no terminations are visible on this one, at least not that I can get a photo of.
avatar
Don Saathoff August 05, 2017 11:53PM
Hello all,

For those of you who are not native American English speakers we have an expression; "to eat humble pie".....well I'm putting on my bib in preparation. It means that I might have made a mistake and must apologize but I'm not eating just yet.

I haven't heard back from Ron yet but I did receive an email from another ardent micro collector here in Southern New Mexico, Joan Beyer. She said that she had a good number of Jones Camp zircons, She said they were TINY, usually anhedral, occasionally euhedral, and pink (did I mention tiny?). I asked if she could photograph one but she is new to photomicrography and they are tiny!

My bib is in place and I'm waiting with fork in hand.....

Don
avatar
Don Saathoff August 06, 2017 12:22AM
OK, It is official, Ron just emailed me. I now have crumbs of humble pie on my bib!!! The image is of actinolite/tremolite. Not zircon!! I've PM'd Rolf with the news.....

Ron sent me a couple of images of the zircons and tomorrow, when I can get to the "real computer" I'll try to upload an image.

Don
avatar
Rolf Luetcke August 06, 2017 12:32AM
Good news, now have the answer.
The crystals are actinolite/tremolite and I will certainly fix this and then search the specimen for the zircons that I am sure are on it but I have not found.
Don, from what you said, Joan Beyer has some and they are pink, gives me a starting point.
Thanks all so much for the assist in this.
Reiner, looks like you had it right on at the beginning.
The specimen has at least 5 different species on it and the actinolites were the nicest xls on the piece.
Ron only listed the zircon and nothing else.
avatar
Owen Lewis August 06, 2017 12:44AM
Pavel Kartashov Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rolf, you may easily to check presence of zircon
> in the specimen under SW UV.

Pavel,
Can you explain? The reference texts I use agree that zircon is most often inert under UVS with occasional weak fluorescence. Reaction under UVL is scarcely any better, the test remaining unreliable. Am I misunderstanding you?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/06/2017 12:47AM by Owen Lewis.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login



bannerbannerbannerbannerbannerbanner
Mineral and/or Locality  
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 1993-2017, except where stated. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us Current server date and time: August 20, 2017 01:11:51
Go to top of page