Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T15:52:32.875Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A chondrodite–humite-spinel marble from Sørfinnset,near Glomfjord, northern Norway

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2018

R. Beadshaw  and
B. E. Leake
R. Beadshaw
Affiliation:
Dept. of Geology, The University, Bristol 8
B. E. Leake
Affiliation:
Dept. of Geology, The University, Bristol 8
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A chemical and modal analysis of the marble, together with chemical analyses of the coexisting spinel and the chondrodite-humite mixture are given. The spinel, a 8·101 ± 0·001 Å, n 1·731 ± 0·003, is much richer in iron (Niggli's mg 0·90), than the humite mixture (mg 0·99), which agrees with the only previous analysis of a coexisting spinel and humite mineral. It was not possible to separate the two humite minerals from each other and analyse them, but the analysis of the mixture shows less iron than any previously analysed chondrodite or humite; the composition is very near to that of humite although the mixture contains at least 50 % chondrodite. It is pointed out that there are serious discrepancies between the chemical analyses of some of the humite minerals and their accepted structural formulae. The possibility that some humite minerals contain irregular numbers of olivine and Mg(OH,F)2-TiO2 layers would fit the available chemical analyses of the humite minerals very well but more structural work is needed as the present scanty X-ray results do not confirm this view. It is suggested that Ti substitution in the humite minerals is primarily controlled by the availability of F in the rock.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical magazine and journal of the Mineralogical Society , Volume 33 , Issue 267 , December 1964 , pp. 1066 - 1080
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1964

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackbkman, (K.J.), 1960. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
Arnold, (K.G.) and Reichen, (L.E.), 1962. Amer. Min., vol. 47, p. 105.Google Scholar
Borneman-Starynkevich, (I.D.) and Myasnikov, (V.S.), BopHeMaH-CTaptiHKumn(H. Д.) H Mhchhkob (B. C), 1950. Okjiaflw Ana,n. HayK Cccp, (Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. Urss), vol. 71, p. 137.Google Scholar
Bothweix, (D.I.) and Hey, (M.H.), 1958. Min. Mag., vol. 31, p. 886.Google Scholar
Clark, (G.L.), Ally, (A.), and Badger, (A.E.), 1931. Amer. Journ. Sci., ser. 5, vol. 22, p. 545.Google Scholar
Deee, (W.A.), Howie, (R.A.), and Zussman, (J.), 1962. Rook-forming minerals. Longmans, London.Google Scholar
Eckermanh, (H. Von), 1922. Geol. For. Forh., vol. 44, p. 381.Google Scholar
Flinter, (B.H.), 1963. Amer. Min., vol. 48, p. 195.Google Scholar
Hafner, (S.) and Laves, (P.), 1961. Zeitschr. Krist., vol. 115, p. 321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollingworth, (S.E.) et al., 1960. 21st Internat. Geol. Congress, Part 19, p. 33.Google Scholar
Larsen, (E.S.), 1928. Amer. Min., vol. 13, p. 354.Google Scholar
Bauer, (L.H.), and Berman, (H.), 1928. Ibid.,p. 350.Google Scholar
Nicholson, (R.), 1960. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of London. and Walton, (B.J.), 1963. Norsk Geol. Tidsk.,vol. 43, p. 1.Google Scholar
Penfield, (S.L.), 1894. Amer. Journ. Sci., ser. 3, vol. 48, p. 30.Google Scholar
Penfield, (S.L.), and Howe, (W.T.), 1894.Ibid., vol. 47, p. 188.Google Scholar
Puch, (W.J.), 1956. Mem. Geol. Surv. U.K.: Mineral resources of Great Britain, vol. 37.Google Scholar
Rankama, (K.) and Sahama (Th. G), 1950. Geochemistry. Univ. of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
Riley, (J.P.), 1958a. Anal. Chim. Acta, vol. 19, p. 413.Google Scholar
Riley, (J.P.), 1958b.Analyst, vol. 83, p. 42.Google Scholar
Rutland, (R. W. R.) et al., 1960. 21st Internat. Geol. Congress, Part 19, p. 43.Google Scholar
Sahama, (Th. G.), 1953. Annales Acad. Sci. Fennicae, ser. A. I l l, Geol.-Geogr., no. 31.Google Scholar
Sjögren, (Hj.), 1882. Zeitschr. Kryst. Min., vol. 7, p. 113.Google Scholar
Sjögren, (Hj.), 1894. Bull. Geol. Inst. Uppsala, vol. 2, p. 44.Google Scholar
Taylor, (W.H.) and West, (J.), 1928. Proc. Roy. Soc, ser. A, vol. 117, p. 517.Google Scholar
Taylor, (W.H.) 1929. Zeitschr. Krist., vol. 70, p. 461.Google Scholar
Thielk, (E.), 1940. Chemie der Erde, vol. 13, p. 64.Google Scholar
Van Valkenburg, (A.), 1961. Journ. Research Nat. Bureau Stand. A, vol. 65A, p. 415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walton, (B.), 1959, Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of London.Google Scholar