LIVE REPORT! The 49th Treasures of the Earth Show - Albuquerque, New Mexico - last updated 1 hour ago. Click here to watch.
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

Uvite not on list of minerals found at Pomba Pit when adding Photo

Posted by John Stolz  
John Stolz May 19, 2017 11:49PM
David Von Bargen May 20, 2017 12:11AM
Yes, minerals are not listed if the mineral is listed as questionable from the location.
John Stolz May 20, 2017 02:54AM
Well, I looked up Uvite, and it took me to a page where they all came from that location.
Jolyon & Katya Ralph May 20, 2017 07:02AM
Why is it questioned?
Jolyon & Katya Ralph May 20, 2017 07:03AM
For now, John, best to list your photo as tourmaline.
Ralph Bottrill May 20, 2017 08:07AM
Uvite is no longer an IMA approved species as all samples analysed turned out to be Fluor-Uvite. ( Why they didn't just make uvite the F end member is another issue!). But this left all uvite photos, including those from this location, orphaned and considered invalid. Maybe we should globally rename them all to Fluor-uvite?
Memo to self : relabel my specimen!

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/20/2017 08:08AM by Ralph Bottrill.
Ilkka Mikkola May 20, 2017 09:11AM
Hi Ralph
Uvite is an IMA approved mineral. See: This was an OH-dominant uvite from Finland (EPMA).
Almost all of the unanalyzed uvites are fluor-uvites

Jolyon & Katya Ralph May 20, 2017 09:42AM
Really what we should have is hydroy-uvite and fluor-uvite, with the term 'uvite' being a generic term for unanalysed.

But that's too sensible I guess
Jolyon & Katya Ralph May 20, 2017 10:03AM
Ok. Please go have a look at the 'Uvite' page now.

This is another area where has had to deviate from standard IMA nomenclature because the nomenclature doesn't represent the reality of what we have to deal with.

Uvite is now a synonym of 'Uvite series'

All photos of 'uvite' are now 'uvite series'

The IMA species 'uvite' which is hydroxyl dominant and pretty scarce is Uvite (OH-dominant end-member). We should NOT add photos to this category (or fluor-uvite) without analysis.

Everything else gets dumped into 'Uvite series'.

And we can also remove the 'questioned' from Uvite on pages where it has been marked questioned simply because of the 'OH/F' issue, as it will now show up as 'uvite series'
John Stolz May 20, 2017 03:22PM
Yikes--has the dust settled?

So Jolyon, is it appropriate to call the mineral "Uvite series" (in which case it should be a choice on the photo list) unless we know by analysis what end of the OH/F series it is? I see that the OH dominant which I think we're calling "Uvite" is not on the photo page, whereas the Fluor-uvite end of the series IS on the photo page....
Alfredo Petrov May 20, 2017 06:05PM
Really what we should have is hydroxy-uvite and fluor-uvite, with the term 'uvite' being a generic term for unanalysed.
But that's too sensible I guess.

Totally agree with that!
Ralph Bottrill May 20, 2017 11:09PM
Thanks Jolyon, I awoke this morning thinking we need to change Uvite to Uvite series and it's all done! I quite agree with hydroxy-uvite, I guess we just need to submit it to the IMA?
Ralph Bottrill May 20, 2017 11:18PM
Thanks Ilkka
Does anyone have analytical confirmation for the other "hydroxy-uvites"?
The only published reference for Pomba was a Min Record article in 1979, haven't checked it for an analysis yet.
Uwe Kolitsch May 21, 2017 02:02PM
"( Why they didn't just make uvite the F end member is another issue!)."
Simple reason - to be consistent with the established nomenclature: Dravite - fluor-dravite, schorl - fluor-schorl, etc.
Ralph Bottrill May 22, 2017 12:09PM
Yes I know but it's seems whenever the IMA try to make all the mineral names in a group consistent in style they just upset everyone. A thankless job, I know they mean well.
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: March 17, 2018 21:51:06
Go to top of page