Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T19:31:14.686Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Markeyite, a new calcium uranyl carbonate mineral from the Markey mine, San Juan County, Utah, USA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2018

Anthony R. Kampf ,
Jakub Plášil ,
Anatoly V. Kasatkin ,
Joe Marty  and
Jiří Čejka
Anthony R. Kampf*
Affiliation:
Mineral Sciences Department, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, 900 Exposition Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90007, USA
Jakub Plášil
Affiliation:
Institute of Physics ASCR, v.v.i., Na Slovance 1999/2, 18221 Prague 8, Czech Republic
Anatoly V. Kasatkin
Affiliation:
Fersman Mineralogical Museum of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Leninsky Prospekt, 18-2, 119071, Moscow, Russia
Joe Marty
Affiliation:
5199 East Silver Oak Road, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA
Jiří Čejka
Affiliation:
Department of Mineralogy and Petrology, National Museum, Cirkusová 1740, 193 00, Prague 9, Czech Republic
*
*E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The new mineral markeyite (IMA2016-090), Ca9(UO2)4(CO3)13·28H2O, was found in the Markey mine, San Juan County, Utah, USA, where it occurs as a secondary phase on asphaltum in association with calcite, gypsum and natrozippeite. The mineral is pale yellowish-green with white streak and fluoresces bright bluish white under a 405 nm laser. Crystals are transparent and have vitreous to pearly lustre. It is brittle, with Mohs hardness 1½ to 2, irregular fracture and three cleavages: perfect on {001}; good on {100} and {010}. The measured density is 2.68 g cm–3. Crystals are blades, flattened on {001} and elongate on [010], exhibiting the forms {100}, {010}, {001}, {110}, {101}, {011} and {111}. Markeyite is optically biaxial (–) with α = 1.538(2), β = 1.542(2) and γ = 1.545(2) (white light); the measured 2V is 81(2)°; the dispersion is r < v (weak); the optical orientation is X = c, Y = b, Z = a; and pleochroism is X = light greenish yellow, Y and Z = light yellow (X > Y ≈ Z). Electron microprobe analyses (energy-dispersive spectroscopy mode) yielded CaO 18.60, UO3 42.90, CO2 21.30 (calc.) and H2O 18.78 (calc.), total 101.58 wt.% and the empirical formula Ca8.91(U1.01O2)4(CO3)13·28H2O. The six strongest powder X-ray diffraction lines are [dobs Å(I)(hkl)]: 10.12(69)(001), 6.41(91)(220,121), 5.43(100)(221), 5.07(33)(301,002,131), 4.104(37)(401,141) and 3.984(34)(222). Markeyite is orthorhombic, Pmmn, a = 17.9688(13), b = 18.4705(6), c = 10.1136(4) Å, V = 3356.6(3) Å3 and Z = 2. The structure of markeyite (R1 = 0.0435 for 3427 Fo > 4σF) contains uranyl tricarbonate clusters (UTC) that are linked by Ca–O polyhedra forming thick corrugated heteropolyhedral layers. Included within the layers is an additional disordered CO3 group linking the Ca–O polyhedra. The layers are linked to one another and to interlayer H2O groups only via hydrogen bonds. The structure bears some similarities to that of liebigite.

Keywords

markeyitenew mineraluranyl tricarbonatecrystal structureliebigiteMarkey mineUtahUSA
Type
Article
Information
Mineralogical Magazine , Volume 82 , Issue 5 , October 2018 , pp. 1089 - 1100
Copyright
Copyright © Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 2018 

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.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor: Ian Graham

References

Anderson, A., Chieh, Ch., Irish, D.E. and Tong, J.P.K. (1980) An X-ray crystallographic, Raman, and infrared spectral study of crystalline potassium uranyl carbonate, K4UO2(CO3)3. Canadian Journal of Chemistry, 58, 1651–1658.Google Scholar
Bartlett, J.R. and Cooney, R.P. (1989) On the determination of uranium-oxygen bond lengths in dioxouranium(VI) compounds by Raman spectroscopy. Journal of Molecular Structure, 193, 295–300.Google Scholar
Brown, I.D. and Altermatt, D. (1985) Bond-valence parameters from a systematic analysis of the inorganic crystal structure database. Acta Crystallographica, B41, 244–247.Google Scholar
Burla, M.C., Caliandro, R., Camalli, M., Carrozzini, B., Cascarano, G.L., Giacovazzo, C., Mallamo, M., Mazzone, A., Polidori, G. and Spagna, R. (2012) SIR2011: a new package for crystal structure determination and refinement. Journal of Applied Crystallography, 45, 357–361.Google Scholar
Burns, P.C. (2005) U6+ minerals and inorganic compounds: insights into an expanded structural hierarchy of crystal structures. Canadian Mineralogist, 43, 1839–1894.Google Scholar
Burns, P.C., Ewing, R.C. and Hawthorne, F.C. (1997) The crystal chemistry of hexavalent uranium: polyhedron geometries, bond-valence parameters, and polymerization of polyhedra. Canadian Mineralogist, 35, 1551–1570.Google Scholar
Čejka, J. (1999) Infrared spectroscopy and thermal analysis of the uranyl minerals. Pp. 521–622. in: Uranium: Mineralogy, Geochemistry and the Environment (Burns, P.C. and Finch, R.C., editors). Reviews in Mineralogy, 38. Mineralogical Society of America, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Čejka, J. (2005) Vibrational spectroscopy of the uranyl minerals – infrared and Raman spectra of the uranyl minerals. II. Uranyl carbonates. Bulletin mineralogicko-petrologického oddělení Národního muzea (Praha), 13, 62–72 [in Czech].Google Scholar
Chenoweth, W.L. (1993) The Geology and Production History of the Uranium Deposits in the White Canyon Mining District, San Juan County, Utah. Utah Geological Survey Miscellaneous Publication, 93–3.Google Scholar
Ferraris, G. and Ivaldi, G. (1988) Bond valence vs. bond length in O···O hydrogen bonds. Acta Crystallographica, B44, 341–344.Google Scholar
Hålenius, U., Hatert, F., Pasero, M. and Mills, S.J. (2017) New minerals and nomenclature modifications approved in 2017. CNMNC Newsletter No. 38, August 2017, page 1038; Mineralogical Magazine, 81, 1033–1038.Google Scholar
Higashi, T. (2001) ABSCOR. Rigaku Corporation, Tokyo.Google Scholar
Kampf, A.R., Plášil, J., Kasatkin, A.V., Marty, J. and Čejka, J. (2016) Klaprothite, péligotite and ottohahnite, three new sodium uranyl sulfate minerals with bidentate UO7–SO4 linkages from the Blue Lizard mine, San Juan County, Utah, USA. Mineralogical Magazine, 80, 753–779.Google Scholar
Kampf, A.R., Plášil, J., Kasatkin, A.V., Marty, J. and Čejka, J. (2017) Markeyite, IMA 2016-090. CNMNC Newsletter No. 35, February 2017, page 211; Mineralogical Magazine, 81, 209–213.Google Scholar
Koglin, E., Schenk, H.J. and Schwochau, K. (1979) Vibrational and low temperature optical spectra of the uranyl tricarbonato complex [UO2(CO3)3]4–. Spectrochimica Acta, 35A, 641–647.Google Scholar
Libowitzky, E. (1999) Correlation of O–H stretching frequencies and O–H⋯O hydrogen bond lengths in minerals. Monatshefte für Chemie, 130, 1047–1059.Google Scholar
Mandarino, J.A. (1976) The Gladstone-Dale relationship – Part 1: derivation of new constants. Canadian Mineralogist, 14, 498–502.Google Scholar
Mandarino, J.A. (2007) The Gladstone–Dale compatibility of minerals and its use in selecting mineral species for further study. Canadian Mineralogist, 45, 1307–1324.Google Scholar
Mereiter, K. (1982) The crystal structure of liebigite, Ca2UO2(CO3)3·~11H2O. Tschermaks Mineralogische und Petrographische Mitteilungen, 30, 277–288.Google Scholar
Olds, T.A., Sadergaski, L., Plášil, J., Kampf, A.R., Burns, P.C., Steele, I.M. and Marty, J. (2016) Leoszilardite, IMA 2015-128. CNMNC Newsletter No. 31, June 2016, page 694; Mineralogical Magazine, 80, 691–697.Google Scholar
Sheldrick, G.M. (2015) Crystal structure refinement with SHELX. Acta Crystallographica, C71, 3–8.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Kampf et al. supplementary material

Supplementary data

Download Kampf et al. supplementary material(File)
File 220.4 KB