Search

The IMA Commission on New Minerals, Nomenclature and Classification has released a newsletter containing information on recently approved new minerals. The newsletter provides details such as names, chemical formulas, type localities, authors, crystal systems, and more. It also includes instructions on how to cite the minerals and where the type materials are deposited. This resource is valuable for mineralogists and researchers studying new mineral species. The newsletter highlights several newly discovered minerals, including Désorite, Lebedevite, Mampsisite, Xenotime-(Gd), Selenodantopaite, Lednevite, Geuerite, Reckibachite, Cafeosite, Nipeiite-(Ce), Moragite, Kvačekite, Ferriphoxite, Carboferriphoxite, Manganohatertite, Giuşcăite, and Ferrimuirite. It provides detailed information on their chemical composition, crystal structure, and location of discovery. Additionally, the newsletter mentions the revised formula of bukovite and the renaming of straßmannite to strassmannite. [Extracted from the article]

The IMA Commission on New Minerals, Nomenclature and Classification has released two newsletters providing information on new mineral proposals approved in August and September 2023. The newsletters include details such as the mineral names, chemical formulas, type localities, crystal systems, and strongest lines in the powder X-ray diffraction patterns. The authors of the new minerals are required to publish a full description of each mineral. The newsletters also mention nomenclature/classification proposals approved in August 2023 and corrections to a previous newsletter. [Extracted from the article]

New guidelines for the nomenclature of polymorphs and polysomes have been approved by the the Commission on New Minerals, Nomenclature and Classification of the International Mineralogical Association (IMA–CNMNC). Several cases can be distinguished. (i) Polymorphs with different crystal systems are distinguished by the prefixes cubo- (cubic), hexa- (hexagonal), tetra- (tetragonal), trigo- (trigonal), ortho- (orthorhombic), clino- (monoclinic) and anortho- (triclinic). (ii) Polymorphs with different crystal systems but showing a pseudosymmetry should show the prefix 'pseudo-'. (iii) Polymorphs with the same crystal system but different space groups are distinguished by the prefix 'para-'. If three or more polymorphs show the same crystal system but different space groups, the space group notation may be added as a suffix, though such a nomenclature should be avoided if possible. (iv) Polymorphs with the same space group are distinguished by the prefix 'para-'. (v) Minerals with polymorph suffixes but with different chemical compositions cannot be considered as true polymorphs, so we recommend using the prefix 'meta-', which indicates a close but significantly different chemical composition. (vi) Polysomatic symbols should be placed as a suffix, which indicates the number and types of modules that alternate in the structure, such as in the högbomite supergroup, or as prefixes as in the sartorite homologous series. These recommendations have to be applied for future new mineral proposals, when the authors decide to use structural prefixes or suffixes, however modifications of historical and well-established names have to pass through the CNMNC for approval. In order to be consistent with the new guidelines, 25 mineral names are now modified: domeykite-β becomes trigodomeykite; fergusonite-(Y)-β becomes clinofergusonite-(Y); fergusonite-(Ce)-β becomes clinofergusonite-(Ce); fergusonite-(Nd)-β becomes clinofergusonite-(Nd); ice-VII becomes cubo-ice; roselite-β becomes anorthoroselite; sulphur-β becomes clinosulphur; mertieite-II becomes mertieite; mertieite-I becomes pseudomertieite; uranophane-α becomes uranophane; uranophane-β becomes parauranophane; gersdorffite- P 213 becomes gersdorffite; gersdorffite- Pa 3 becomes paragersdorffite; gersdorffite- Pca 21 becomes orthogersdorffite; betalomonosovite becomes paralomonosovite; lammerite-β becomes paralammerite; nováčekite-I becomes hydronováčekite; nováčekite-II becomes nováčekite; halloysite-7Å becomes halloysite; halloysite-10Å becomes hydrohalloysite; metauranocircite-I becomes metauranocircite; taimyrite-I becomes taimyrite; uranocircite-II becomes uranocircite; andorite IV becomes quatrandorite; and andorite VI becomes senandorite. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

CNMNC Newsletter 70; Mineralogical Magazine, B 87 b , https://doi.org/10.1180/mgm.2022.135 Symbol for raydemarkite The correct symbol for the new mineral raydemarkite (IMA No. 2022-015) is ryd, and not rdy, as given in CNMNC Newsletter 68. CNMNC Newsletter 70, Mineralogical Magazine, B 87 b , https://doi.org/10.1180/mgm.2022.135 IMA No. B 2022-061 b Cuprodobrovolskyite Na SB 4 sb Cu(SO SB 4 sb ) SB 3 sb Cdvo Arsenatnaya fumarole, Second scoria cone of the Northern Breakthrough of the Great Tolbachik Fissure Eruption, Tolbachik volcano, Kamchatka peninsula, Far-Eastern Region, Russia (55°41' N, 160°14' E, 1200 m a.s.l.) CNMNC Newsletter 70, Mineralogical Magazine, B 87 b , https://doi.org/10.1180/mgm.2022.135 IMA No. B 2022-064 b Antipovite Cu SB 5 sb O SB 2 sb (PO SB 4 sb ) SB 2 sb Antp Arsenatnaya fumarole, Second scoria cone of the Northern Breakthrough of the Great Tolbachik Fissure Eruption, Tolbachik volcano, Kamchatka peninsula, Far-Eastern Region, Russia (55°41' N, 160°14' E, 1200 m a.s.l.). [Extracted from the article]

- Polysomatic symbols have to be placed as a suffix, which indicates the number and types of modules which alternate in the structure as in the högbomite supergroup, or as prefixes as in the sartorite homologous series. The ideal formula of cooperite (PtS) remains as currently given in the IMA List of Minerals. The information given here is provided by the IMA Commission on New Minerals, Nomenclature and Classification for comparative purposes and as a service to mineralogists working on new species. [Extracted from the article]

Mineral species should be identified by an end-member formula and by using the dominant-valency rule as recommended by the IMA–CNMNC. However, the dominant-end-member approach has also been used in the literature. These two approaches generally converge, but for some intermediate compositions, significant differences between the dominant-valency rule and the dominant end-member approach can be observed. As demonstrated for garnet-supergroup minerals, for example, the end-member approach is ambiguous, as end-member proportions strongly depend on the calculation sequence. For this reason, the IMA–CNMNC strongly recommends the use of the dominant-valency rule for mineral nomenclature, because it alone may lead to unambiguous mineral identification. Although the simple application of the dominant-valency rule is successful for the identification of many mineral compositions, sometimes it leads to unbalanced end-member formulae, due to the occurrence of a coupled heterovalent substitution at two sites along with a heterovalent substitution at a single site. In these cases, it may be useful to use the site-total-charge approach to identify the dominant root-charge arrangement on which to apply the dominant-constituent rule. The dominant-valency rule and the site-total-charge approach may be considered two procedures complementary to each other for mineral identification. Their critical point is to find the most appropriate root-charge and atomic arrangements consistent with the overriding condition dictated by the end-member formula. These procedures were approved by the IMA−CNMNC in May 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

IMA Commission on New Minerals, Nomenclature and Classification (CNMNC) Newsletter 63, Mineralogical Magazine, 84. B IMA No. 2021-053 b - Tombstoneite Type material is deposited in the mineralogical collections of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, 900 Exposition Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90007, USA, catalogue number 76198 B IMA No. 2021-054 b - Aldomarinoite Valletta mine, Vallone della Valletta, Canosio (CN), Maira Valley, Piedmont, Italy (44°23'54"N, 7°05'37"E, 2560 m a.s.l.) B Keywords: b newsletter 63, corrigendum After Newsletter 63 went to press, we became aware of two mistakes concerning (1) the catalogue number of the deposited holotype tombstoneite, and (2) the type locality of aldomarinoite. [Extracted from the article]