Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T09:21:22.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cesium kupletskite renamed kupletskite-(Cs)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2018

P. Bayliss
P. Bayliss*
Affiliation:
Mineralogy, Australian Museum, 6 College Street, Sydney, N.S.W. 2010, Australia
*
*E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cesium kupletskite has been renamed kupletskite-(Cs) with the approval of the IMA Commission on New Minerals, Nomenclature and Classification, because the name of a mineral species should be a single word and the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry spelling is caesium. The presence or absence of parentheses around the suffix chemical-element is discussed. The advantages of the chemical-element suffix nomenclature are stated.

Keywords

cesium kupletskitecaesiummineral nomenclaturechemical-element suffixCNMNCIMA
Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical Magazine , Volume 71 , Issue 3 , June 2007 , pp. 365 - 367
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 2007

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

Bayliss, P. (2000) Glossary of Obsolete Mineral Names. Mineralogical Record Inc., Tucson, Arizona, USA, 235 pp.Google Scholar
Bayliss, P., Kaesz, H.D. and Nickel, E.H. (2005) The use of chemical-element adjectival modifiers in mineral nomenclature. The Canadian Mineralogist, 43, 1429–1433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bayliss, P. and Levinson, A.A. (1988) A system of nomenclature for rare-earth mineral species: revision and extension. American Mineralogist, 73, 422–423.Google Scholar
Chukanov, N.V., Pekov, I.V. and Khomoyakov, A.P. (2002) Recommended nomenclature for labuntsovite- group minerals. European Journal of Mineralogy, 14, 165–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coombs, D.S., Alberti, A., Armbruster, T., Artioli, G., Colella, C., Galli, E., Grice, J.D., Liebau, F., Mandarino, J.A., Minato, H., Nickel, E.H., Passaglia, E., Peacor, D.R., Quartieri, S., Rinaldi, R., Ross, M., Sheppard, R.A., Tillmanns, E. and Vezzalini, G. (1998) Recommended Nomenclature for zeolite minerals: report of the subcommittee on zeolites of the International Mineralogical Association, Commission on New Minerals and Mineral Names. Mineralogical Magazine, 62, 533–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deliens, M. and Piret, P. (1986) La kusuïte devient la wakefieldite-(Ce) plombifère. Bulletin de Minéralogie, 109, 305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Efimov, A.F., Dusmatov, V.D., Ganzeev, A.A. and Kataeva, Z.T. (1971) Cesium kupletskite, a new mineral. American Mineralogist, 57, 328.Google Scholar
Jambor, J.L. and Roberts, A.C. (2001) Wallkilldellite- (Fe). American Mineralogist, 86, 198.Google Scholar
Leigh, G.J. (editor) (1990) Nomenclature of Inorganic Chemistry, Recommendations 1990, issued by the Commission on Nomenclature of Inorganic Chemistry. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, UK, 289 pp.Google Scholar
Levinson, A.A. (1966) A system of nomenclature for rare-earth minerals. American Mineralogist, 51, 152–158.Google Scholar
Mandarino, J.A. and Back, M.E. (2004) Fleischer’s Glossary of Mineral Species 2004. Mineralogical Record Inc., Tucson, Arizona, USA, 309 pp.Google Scholar
Nickel, E.H. and Grice, J.D. (1998) The IMA Commission on New Minerals and Mineral Names: procedures and guidelines on mineral nomenclature. The Canadian Mineralogist, 36, 913–926.Google Scholar
Sharp, H., Mari, G. and Chiappero, P.J. (1999) Wallkilldellite-Fe, (Ca,Cu)4Fe6[(As,Si)O4]4 (OH)8·18H2O, a new mineral from the Roua mine (Alpes-Maritimes, France). Riviéro Scientifique, 12, 5–12.Google Scholar
Spencer, L.J. (1925) International agreement in mineralogical and crystallographical nomenclature. Mineralogical Magazine, 20, 353–363.Google Scholar
White, J.S. (2004) The nomenclature debacle. Rocks and Minerals, 79, 192–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar