SUPPORT US. If mindat.org is important to you, click here to donate to our Fall 2019 fundraiser!
Log InRegister
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 ElementsBooks & Magazines
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 MuseumsMineral Shows & EventsThe Mindat DirectoryDevice Settings
Photo SearchPhoto GalleriesNew Photos TodayNew Photos YesterdayMembers' Photo GalleriesPast Photo of the Day GalleryMineral Photography

18th Oct 2019 17:28 UTCErik Vercammen Expert

Is
IMA No. 2019-003 Tetrahedrite-(Hg) Cu6(Cu4Hg2)Sb4S13

the same as the old  "schwazite"?

18th Oct 2019 19:11 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager

Lauraniite added.

18th Oct 2019 20:31 UTCRichard Gunter Expert

Interesting formula with no Fe or Zn and S exactly 13. It will be interesting to see the analyses.

18th Oct 2019 20:47 UTCFrank K. Mazdab Manager

It is interesting but it's not unexpected.  The Hg takes the place of the (Fe,Zn), and the S13 is just the S12S typical of most (but not all) tetrahedrite group minerals.

I've been trying to encourage a former student I previously worked with to do the workup for what would be a new Ag-Hg end-member of the group that he found here in Arizona as part of his dissertation, one with the full 2 apfu Hg and close to the 6 apfu Ag. But now that he has a full time job, he has less time (and enthusiasm) for jumping through IMA hoops.

18th Oct 2019 22:08 UTCRichard Gunter Expert

Hi Frank:

Would it be worthwhile to record what he has found on Mindat with the note that the information is incomplete?

19th Oct 2019 04:18 UTCFrank K. Mazdab Manager

Hi Richard,

That's a good idea.  If he included data for it in his dissertation, then it's an easy matter to add.  However, if he didn't think that including mention of a "mercurian freibergite" was noteworthy enough to explicitly mention in his dissertation (his interests aren't in mineralogy), then it'd be best I get his blessing first, even though I have his data on it somewhere on my computer. Even if he ultimately isn't the one to get around to officially submitting it as a new mineral, the acknowledgement of his dissertation (or his collection) here would be nice.

7th Nov 2019 13:44 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager

Is
IMA No. 2019-003 Tetrahedrite-(Hg) Cu6(Cu4Hg2)Sb4S13

the same as the old  "schwazite"?
 
No. "Schwazite" was never rich in Hg (see literature).
Any "Mercurian Tetrahedrite" that is Hg-dominant on the Hg/Zn/Fe site would be identical to tetrahedrite-(Hg) - page will be corrected.


2019-003 now added (just analysed from an Austrian locality as well).

Also changed all formulae in the group to those in the IMA list.

10th Nov 2019 20:43 UTCRalph Bottrill Manager

Maybe the original schwazite was not really Hg-rich but that’s certainly the way the name has been used elsewhere, eg Balcanoona. Have other Schwazites been analysed recently? If none are Hg-rich maybe we need to remove it as a synonym of mercurian tetrahedrite?

11th Nov 2019 09:45 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager

Have other Schwazites been analysed recently?
 
Yes.
Arlt, T. & Diamond, L.W. (1999) Mineralnamen und Mineralogiegeschichte: Gab es je Schwazit in Schwaz? Lapis 24(12), 45-46. [on never confirmed Hg-richness of "schwazite"]

11th Nov 2019 17:02 UTCRalph Bottrill Manager

So are we saying tetrahedrite-(Hg) doesn’t exist? We currently have three locations for it, but two are for swazite also, so presumably invalid? Have the Italian and South Australian ones been tested?

11th Nov 2019 17:31 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager

So are we saying tetrahedrite-(Hg) doesn’t exist?
 No. It was approved only this year, with three cotype localities.

EDIT: You can certainly assume that some of the material reported as
"Mercurian Tetrahedrite" or "Schwazite"
could be tetrahedrite-(Hg), but a reliable confirmation of Hg-dominance would of course be needed.


11th Nov 2019 19:49 UTCFrank K. Mazdab Manager

00385420015735017296428.jpg

I too had been under the impression that "schwazite" was a mecurian tertrahedrite, but in the context of this current discussion, I had not assumed it had to be the Hg-dominant end-member (i.e. the new tetrahedrite-(Hg))... I had just assumed it had a notable Hg enrichment.


10th Nov 2019 16:59 UTCKnut Edvard Larsen Manager

Note: IMA 2017-082a is misspelled in the CNMNC newsletter as Vittinkiiite with three "i", correct should be with only two "i"s:  Vittinkiite

The name is probably given for the typelocality, Vittinki iron mines
In the history of mineralogy there is already another mineral, now a variety of neotocite, named after the locality - but using the old Swedish name for this locality, "Vittinge". 
See Vittingit (or Wittingite  or  Vittinkit as is spelled in some litterature).

11th Nov 2019 20:38 UTCKnut Edvard Larsen Manager

All new minerals added to the database and locality pages updated.

12th Nov 2019 13:13 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager

Thanks a lot Knut Edvard!
 
Mineral and/or Locality  
Mindat.org is an outreach project of the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization. Public Relations by Blytheweigh.
Copyright © mindat.org and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2019, except where stated. Most political location boundaries are © OpenStreetMap contributors. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us Current server date and time: November 12, 2019 15:28:04
Go to top of page