Introduction
Criteria for a new mineral species
General considerations
『A mineral substance is a naturally occurring solid that has been formed by geological processes, either on earth or in extraterrestrial bodies (Nickel 1995a). A mineral species is a mineral substance with welldefined chemical composition and crystallographic properties, and which merits a unique name. General criteria for defining mineral species are given below. In practice, most mineral species conform to these criteria, but exceptions and borderline cases inevitably arise, and ultimately each proposal to introduce a new mineral species or to change mineral nomenclature must be considered on its own merits.』
The concept of a mineral species
『A mineral species is defined mainly on the basis of its chemical composition and crystallographic properties, and these must therefore be the key factors in determining whether the creation of a new mineral species and a new mineral name is justified. If a mineral is found whose composition or crystallographic properties (or both) are substantially different from those of any existing mineral species, there is a possibility that it may be a new species. A general guideline for compositional criteria is that at least one structural site in the potential new mineral should be predominantly occupied by a different chemical component than that which occurs in the equivalent site in an existing mineral species.』
Suibstances formed by human intervention
『Anthropogenic substances, i.e. those made by Man, are not
regarded as minerals. However, there are other cases in which
human intervention in the creation of a substance is less direct,
and the borderline between mineral and non-mineral can be unclear.
One such case is the occurrence of new substances that owe their
origin, at least in part, to human activities such as mining or
quarrying. If such substances are formed purely as a result of
the exposure of existing rock or minerals to the atmosphere or
to the effects of groundwater, they can generally be accepted
as minerals. However, if their occurrence is due, at least in
part, to the interaction of existing minerals with substances
of non-geological origin such as blasting powder, corroded human
artifacts or industrially contaminated water, then such products
are not to be regarded as minerals.
Substances formed by combustion are not generally regarded as
minerals. A contentious issue is the occurrence of substances
in the combustion products of coal mines, waste dumps or peat
bogs. The origin of a particular fire is often difficult to determine,
and therefore the possibility of human intervention cannot be
entirely eliminated, nor can the possibility of human artifacts
contributing to the combustion products. It has
therefore been decided that, as a general rule, products of combustion
are not to be considered as minerals in the future.
Another contentious issue is whether substances formed by the
action of air or water on anthropogenic substances should be regarded
as minerals. A wellknown example is that of the Laurium “minerals”
formed by the reaction of seawater with ancient metallurgical
slags. A potential problem with accepting similar products as
minerals in the modern age is that a multitude of unusual substances
could be created purposely by exposing exotic Man-made materials
to the influence of weathering agents, and it would not be appropriate
to give such substances the same status as minerals formed entirely
by geological processes. It was therefore decided that substances
formed from Man-made materials by geological agents should not
be accepted as minerals in the future (Nickel 1995a). However,
the exclusion of such substances from the
mineral lexicon does not preclude their description as artificial
substances.
Substances that would not be accepted as minerals according to
the above criteria, but which have been accepted in the past are
not to be automatically discredited as a result of the new rulings,
as it is not our intention to roll back the clock but rather to
establish guidelines for the future.』
Biogenic substances 『It is not always possible to draw a sharp
distinction between biogenic substances, i.e. those produced by
biological processes, and minerals, which are normally produced
by geological processes. For instance, it is becoming increasingly
clear that many of the processes associated with diagenesis are
influenced, to some extent, by bacterial action, and the biosphere
is commonly regarded as an integral part of the geochemical cycle.
Nevertheless, it is necessary to make a formal distinction so
as to prevent a host of purely biological materials being incorporated
into the world of minerals. Some biogenic substances, such as
hydroxylapatite in teeth, whewellite in urinary calculi or aragonite
in the
shells of molluscs, also exist as minerals formed by geochemical
processes, and therefore are regarded as valid minerals. However,
purely biogenic substances that have no geological counterparts,
or whose origin owes essentially nothing to geological processes,
are not regarded as minerals.
However, substances formed by the action of geological processes
on organic material, such as the chemical compounds crystallized
from organic matter in shale or from bat guano, can be accepted
as minerals.』
Amorphos substances
The matter of size
Stability under ambient conditions
Polymorphs
Polytypes and polytypoids
Regular interstratifications
Polysomatic series
Modulated structures
Solid-solution series
Requirements for the approval of new minerals
Treatment of a new-mineral proposal
Mineral groups
Changes to existing nomenclature
General
Redefinition
Discreditation
Revalidation
Type specimens
Preparation of a nomenclature proposal
General guidlines for mineral nomenclature
Choice of a new mineral name
Rare-earth minerals
Extended Levinson modifiers
Adjectival modifiers
Varietal names
Nomenclature of mineral groups
Nomenclature of polytypes, polytypoids and polymorphs
Nomenclature of nanometric domains
Nomenclature of variable-fit homologous series
Prefixes in mineral names
Hyphens in mineral names
Mineral names for synthetic substances
Publication of the descriptions of approved minerals
Advice to editors
References
Appendix I. Members of the IMA Commission on New Minerals and
Mineral Names
Appendix II. Changes in nomenclature, 1987-1997