the Scanned PDF - Mineralogical Society of America

Transcription

American Mineralogist, Volume 72, pages 102-1 12, 1987
A review of Miissbauer data on trioctahedral micas:
Evidencefor tetrahedral Fe3+and cation ordering
M. D.q.RBvDvan*
Division of Geologicaland Planetary Sciences,California Institute of Technology,Pasadena,California 9l125, U.S.A.
ABSTRACT
Over fifty studies on M6ssbauer spectroscopyof trioctahedral micas are summarized
and reviewed in order to determine reasonablerangesfor parametersof different Fe sites.
Typical values(in units of mm/s) include Fefr,,*r-isomer
shift (d): 1.13,quadrupolesplitt i n g ( A ) : 2 . 5 8 ; F e i n i - d : l . l 2 a n d l 1 6 , A : 2 . 0 5 a n d 2 . 7 5 :F e i n l - d : 0 . 4 0 , A : 0 . 5 5 ;
Fefr*r-D: 0.40, A : 1.00; FeLf-D :0.20, A : 0.50. The effectsof major-elementcomposition on M0ssbauer parameters are assessedand found to be minimal, though the
substitution of Li in the octahedral sheetsystematicallyaffectsthe quadrupole splitting of
the Fe(rl doublet. The Mdssbauer and compositional data consideredtogether show that
tetrahedral [l - Fs:+ substitution may be controlled by octahedral cation size and that
M2-Ml cation ordering is ubiquitous.
0 . 5 0 ,A : 0 . 4 0 - 1 . 0 ;F e l " i - D : 0 . 9 0 - 1 . 0 ,A : 1 . 5 - 1 . 8 ;
:
When the technique of M<issbauerspectroscopywas F e 3 J - d l . l - 1 . 2 , A : 1 . 8 - 3 . 1 .
2 shows a plot of isomer shift vs. quadrupole
Figure
initially applied to minerals, biotites were among the first
for
all the analysescollected. The data for Fe2+
splitting
samplesto be analyzed(Pollak et al., 1962). Since then a
M2
cluster
tightly aroundA:2.58 and 6 : l.13 mm/
at
micas
have
large number of trioctahedral
been studied
that
the local geometry about the M2 site is
s,
suggesting
with the Mdssbauereffect. This paper evaluatesonly the
by the broad compositional range
not
radically
affected
room-temperature work done over the past 23 years, as
For
the
data for Fe2* at Ml, one group
these
samples.
of
the effectsof temperatureand dehydroxylation on MdssA : 2.05 and 6 : 1.12, and'a
around
clusters
of
analyses
reviewed
by
Hellerstudies
of
micas
have
been
bauer
group
falls around A:2.75 and
more
scattered
second,
Kallai and Rozenson(1981). Three distinct areasof in: Ll6 mm/s. For Fe2*,lower quadrupolesplittinggen6
vestigation are addressed:(l) What are reasonableranges
(the reverse
for Mdssbauer parametersof Fe in the different sites in erally implies more distortion around a site
the effects
of
some
combination
micas? (2) How do variables such as composition affect is true for Fe3+),owing to
components
angular
and
distances
metal-to-oxygen
of
Miissbauer results?Are isomer shift (I.S. or D)and quadquantirupole splitting (Q.S. or A) affectedby other cations ad- (however, this relationship has never been fully
jacent to Fe in the mica structure?Is there a differencein fied). Thereforethere seemto be three types ofFe2* sites:
peak-areadata of igneousvs. metamorphic samples?(3) a distorted Fe2+Ml site, the Fe2* M2 site, and a regular
Fe2+Ml site.
Is there evidencefor cation ordering in micas?
Mdssbauer data for Fe3* sites are less well defined;
Figure I showsa drawing of the mica structure that can
in my opinion the wider range of values may
however,
be used in the following discussion:details of structural
proceduresand is rol
variations in trioctahedral micas are given by Bailey be due to a problem with the fitting
Fe3+at M2 and Ml
effects.
compositional
on
dependent
(1984a, 1984b), Guggenheim(1984), and Weiss et al.
: 0.35-0.65mm/s, althougheach
range
D
of
has
a
similar
(l 985).
group has its own rangeof A : 0. I I -O.80 and 0.57-l .24
PARAMETERS
mm/s respectively.Fe3+peaksare almost always less inRlNcps or MossnluER
than the correspondingFe2+peaksin the samesamtense
Mtissbauer and electron-microprobe data on trioctaples
(except
in ferri-annitesand ferri-phlogopites).In genhedral micas are compiled in the Appendix and plotted
precisewhen peak
in Figure 2. For Fe in oxygen environments, the isomer- eral, fitted Mtissbauerdoublets are less
which
Fe3+A values lie
in
The
samples
small.
areas
are
shift and quadrupole-splitting values (as calibrated in
probably
represent spectra
1.0
mm/s
0.60
and
between
millimeters per second relative to an Fe-foil spectrum)
present
M2
and Ml, but in
was
at
both
which
Fe3+
in
most commonly fall in the following ranges(Dyar, 1984):
Fel"i-D : 0.15-0.30,A : 0.30-0.60;Fell-d : 0.35- such small quantities that it was impossible to distinguish
them. The resultant single Fe3+doublet in such samples
* Presentaddress:Department of Geology, University of Orhas a A that is the averageof the A values for the two
egon,Eugene,Oregon97403,U.S.A.
separatesites.
INrnooucrroN
0003-004x/87l01024102$02.00
ro2
103
DYAR: MOSSBAUERDATA ON TRIOCTAHEDRALMICAS
6666666
-3+
,,o* o,t*
OO
6
FE
o
1A
Fig. 1. Scale drawing of a typical trioctahedral mica crystal structure. Ions in the structure are shown schematically; relative (to
scale)sizesof the various substituting cations are shown at right.
In the petrologic literature, there has been a consensus
that Fe3+does not occur at tetrahedral sites in biotites
(Guidotti, 1984), although a few authors have made a
casefor Felj when 2(Si + Al) < 8 (Foster, 1960;Dawson
et al., 1980;Miyano and Miand Smith, 19771'Delaney
yano, 1982). However, Mdssbauer parametersfor tetrahedral Fe3+ are well-defined by studies of tetra-ferriphlogopite (seesample 87) and clintonites (samples5963). Of the Mtissbauer data collected in this study, 3l
samplescontain Felf with parametersaveragingd : 0.20
and A:0.50 mm/s. Twenty samplesare Al-deficient,
whereasI I have excessAl. This observation will be discussedin a later section.
bauer spectrum. In the case of biotite, the optical transition is easily observed, but the thermal interaction is
not observed at room temperature. Possibly the charge
transfer in biotite is occurring too rapidly to be measured
by the Mdssbauereffect.
r
I
q
IurnnvtnNcE
cHARGETRANSFERAND MossBAUER
SPECTRA OF BIOTITES
It is well known from optical spectrathat chargetransfer ofelectrons can occur betweenFe2+and Fe3+in edgesharingoctahedra(Gilkes etal, 1972;Robbins and Strens,
1972; Smith, 1978); biotites are pleochroic becauseof
this intervalence phenomena. However, intervalence
charge-transferdoublets do not appear in biotite spectra
as they do in ilvaite, magnetite,and many other minerals
(Burns, 1981). This issue can be addressedwith a brief
explanation of the difference between the two types of
mixed valenceinteractions (Nolet and Burns, 1979).The
term "charge transfer" is normally applied to dynamic
optical (phonon) transitions, as have been observed by
the workers listed above. Electron delocalizationrefers to
thermally activated phenomena as observed in a Mdss-
u
@
a = trans-M1
o= cis-M2
v= tet
OUADRUPOLESPLITTING
Fig.2. Plot of isomer shift vs. quadrupole splitting (in mm/
s) for all analysescollected (seeAppendix). Following the precedent ofBancroft and Brown (1975), the Fe3+doublet with the
largest quadrupole splitting is assignedto represent the traw'Ml
site; the Fe3+doublet with the smaller A correspondsto the c,sM2 site. For Fe'z+,the correspondenceis reversed: small A is
equatedro the trans-Ml site, and large A representsthe crs-M2
site.
IO4
Table1. Gorrelation
(r) for M6ssbauerand compositional
parametersregressedagainstone another
coefficients
Al"
-0.97
Fei"*
0 04
-o.27
At",
-0.15
0.20
-0.22
Fe9,*
-0.32
0.34
-0.26
0.03
0,06
-0.05
-0.04
-0.20
0.38
Mg
*0.20
0.18
0,01
* 0.43
-0.38
-0.40
FE,
0.13
-0.15
0.17
-0.02
0.25
0.36
-o.74
Ca
0.11
-0.14
0.00
0.04
-0.13
-0.09
0.01
-0.29
0.49
-0.46
-0.23
o.77
-0.54
-0.04
-o.71
-o.44
0.77
-0.88
0.82
0.08
0.23
0.20
-0.20
0.29
-0.41
- 0.14
-0.43
Na
0.09
-0.06
-0.12
-0.26
-0.15
-0.13
0.30
-0.30
0.18
-0.61
*0.10
D1
0.81
-0.75
*0.11
0.00
-0.01
0.11
-0.30
0.36
-0.08
-0.09
-0.96
0.05
0.25
-0.21
-0.05
0.26
-0.25
-0.23
0.00
-0.07
0.04
0.31
-0.38
0.21
0.26
tively large Li cation (charge-balancedby Al and Fe3+)in
the octahedrallayer is accommodatedby structural rearHeller-Kallai and Rozenson(1981) listed six factors rangementor distortion of adjacent oxygens,which is in
that could affect Mdssbauer parametersof Fe at the oc- turn reflectedby increasedA values for Fe2+at Ml. Retahedral sites in phyllosilicates: (1) nature ofthe octahe- cent work by Weisset al. (1985)indicatesthat Ml tends
dral sheets,(2) Fe content of the samples, (3) chemical to be most distorted by flattening in those ordered cases
composition of the octahedral sheets,(4) nature and dis- where it is occupied by a large cation (such as Li); this
tribution of next-nearestneighbors, (5) geometry of the argument supportsthe observedincreasein A for Li-bearing samples.Unfortunately, Li analysescould be found
sites, and (6) covalency efects.
To investigate possible relationships between compo- in the literature for only 19 samples in the data base;
sition and M0ssbauerparameters,a multiple linear cor- perhaps the correlation would be even stronger if more
relation analysis was done on the data in the Appendix. Li data were available.
Multiple correlation coefrcients (R) were computed for
DATA AppLIED To cRysrAr
Srrp-occuplNcy
each pair ofvariables and are listed in Table l. In addiCHEMISTRY
tion to analysisofeach singlevariable againstevery other
single variable, correlation coemcientswere also calcuPerhapsthe most useful aspectof this literature review
lated for combinations of up to three variables againstall is that it has yielded a unique set ofdata on Fe site ocother possible combinations (of up to three variables); cupancy for trioctahedral micas. Before exploring the re8 2357 ll combinationswere checked.
lationships of this complete data set, it is important to
A few obvious correlations exist; for example, tetra- add a few cautionary notes on the reliability of site-ochedral Si and Al have a high correlation (R :0.97) be- cupancy data generatedby fitting of Mossbauer spectra.
cause they often fill the site. Similarly Ca and K (R :
Preliminary work on the precision of the Mdssbauertech-0.96) correlate highly. Cations that commonly substi- nique in simple spectra(as calculatedfrom repeatedruns
tute for each other are strongly related; octahedral Fe2+ of the same sample) suggeststhat area data are good to
and Mg have an R : -0.74.
a3oloof the total area. This representsa lower limit on
As mentioned above, the fact that Feffi A valuescluster the technique.Furthermore, there is often a problem with
in two groups might be attributed to some compositional preferred orientation of the samples,which is difficult to
efect. Analysis of multiple combinations of variables overcome in micas. Hogg and Meads (1970) suggested
clearly identifies the source ofthis effect; regressionofA
that this is not a problem if the particle sizein the sample
of Fefrolvs. octahedral Al + Fe3* + Li yields R : 0.95. holder is below 5 pm. Careful sample preparation, inThe A of Fefrrlvs. Li content alone is also strongly cor- cluding mounting the particles with some inert medium
related (R :0.87), rhough A of Feffi vs. Alu, + Fe?J is to prevent their becoming oriented, is always called for
not (R less than 0.70). Possibly the presenceof the rela- in mica studies.However, in a survey paper such as this,
Errncrs oF MICA coMposlTroN oN
MossnnuBn pARAMETERS
105
Table1. Continued
oc
A'I
0.41
-0.37
0.01
-0.31
-0.32
-0.01
0.18
-0.09
-0.09
-0.0s
-0.40
0.38
o28
0.36
0.20
-o.24
0.16
0.18
-0.49
-0.26
0.20
-0.18
-0.28
u.oo
-0.23
0.38
0.17
0.80
0.35
0.46
-0.45
0.14
0.29
-0.51
-0.30
0.21
-0.25
-0.27
0.87
-0.36
0.27
0.32
0.40
0.30
0.58
-0.04
0.10
-0.24
-0.30
0.15
-0.06
0.46
*0.25
-0.32
-0.59
0.08
0.10
-0.08
0.14
0.13
0.15
-0.12
-0.13
0.13
*0.03
-0.18
-0.03
0.25
-0.35
0.08
0.29
0.25
0.25
-0.30
-0.03
0.29
0.09
0.01
-0.16
0.25
0.08
-0.08
-0.27
0.26
-0.05
-0.02
-0.59
-0.04
-0.32
0.28
0.04
0.12
0.09
-0.24
0.25
-0.59
0.15
0.38
-0.45
0.32
0.21
-0.16
0.09
0.11
0.36
0.20
0.06
- 0 . 19
-0.05
-0.25
0.34
0.28
0.53
0.s0
0.19
-0.40
-0.25
0.07
0.09
0.07
-0.33
0.72
-0.92
-o.72
0.30
0.12
-0.23
0.32
-0.19
-0.61
0.75
-0.65
-0.52
0.63
-0.55
0.14
0.23
0.07
0.01
-0.28
o.27
-0.08
0.43
0.27
-0.06
-0.02
-0.16
-0.51
0.34
0-47
it is impossible to determine if anomalous area data are
the result of faulty sample preparation.
Another problem with Mdssbauerarea data hinges on
the undetermined value for relative recoil-free fraction in
micas. In someminerals, suchas garnets,the line strength
ofFe3+ peakscan be significantlylarger than those ofFe2+
peaks (Whipple, 1974). In the garnet structure, the Fe3+
is held more rigidly at its octahedral site, such that fewer
of the Fe3+atoms recoil than than do Fe2+at their eightcoordinated sites.The resultant Mtlssbauerspectrum app€arsto have more Fe3+than is actually present,and the
resultant area data must be con:ectedfor this differential
recoil-free fraction effect. Whipple (197a) examined a
phlogopite and a biotite to determine relative line
strengths,but unfortunately his results were inconclusive
(Roro,,r"
was 0.78, where R : Mdsswas 1.18, Rpmogopire
bauer-determinedFe3*/Fe?+ratio divided by the chemratio). Thus it is not known
ically determined Fe3+/Fe'z+
whether differential recoil-free fraction efects are biasing
the Mdssbauer area data; it is hoped that such effects
would be small.
Finally, another problem with the areadata for biotites
was raised by Mineeva (1978), who interpreted the wide
spread of M2lMl values to be a sign of overfitting; she
concluded that only two doublets were present. In my
opinion, the area data are real, for the following reasons:
(l) peak positions for the M2 and Ml (both Fe3+ and
Fe'?*)peaksare fairly consistentthroughout the l5l samples reviewed here. If two doublets do not really exist,
the positions of all the peakswould be more random. (2)
As discussedabove, A values for the Feinldoublet can be
explained as a systematic function of octahedral Li, Al,
and Fe3+content. If the Ml doublet doesnot really exist,
0.08
-0.32
0.17
0.52
-0.68
-0.89
o.22
YoFe+
M2IM1
0.32
-0.19
-0.37
-0.20
0.18
0.03
0.14
-0.22
0.00
-0.14
-0.04
-0.07
0 . 19
0.09
-0.11
-0.23
0.27
-0.59
0.24
-0.48
-0.02
0.42
0.30
0.08
0.22
0.19
0.14
-0.25
0.26
0.14
-o.22
-0.04
0.69
0.32
0.07
-0.39
0.15
-0.07
0.15
-0.07
-0.27
0.51
0.08
-0.20
0.21
0.53
*0.17
Al"
FeP,"
Alr
Ti
Fef'*
Mg
Fe2*
Mn
Li
Ca
Na
K
d1
A1
ol
A2
63
A3
D4
A4
d5
AJ
o/" Fe,
it is unlikely that such a logical colTelation would be found
betweenthose variables.
cHANGESBASEDoN cATroN sIzE
The compositional substitutions in mica are firmly
based on the principle of maintenanceof charge balance
in the structure. However, as was discussedin the Introduction, the sizes of substituting cations also affect the
structure. Hazen and Wones (1972) found a strong correlation between ionic radius of R2+ and b-, which is
intuitively obvious when the wide range of cation sizes
is considered(seeFig. l). Tetrahedral rotation may also
accommodate size differences between tetrahedral and
octahedral sheets.It is known that a is minimized when
octahedral-cationradius increasesto 0.76 A (Hazen and
Wones, 1972);it is also known that a may be as large as
22" in clintonites, in which the low Si/AI", ratio compensates for Ca substitution at the A site (Annersten and
Olesch, 1978). Data assembledfor this review provide
yet another important constraint on Si/Al,., as a function
of cation size,as follows:
It was noticed that in ll of the 3l FeiJ-bearing samples, Si + Al > 8. Tetrahedral Al is apparently displaced
by Fe3+.This does not comply with crystal-chemicalexpectations; the small Al cation generally should have a
greater preference for the smaller tetrahedral site than
does the larger Fefi. Contrary to the results of Annersten
and Olesch (1978), Figure 3 shows that Si/Al ratios do
not particularly control this substitutional phenomenon:
triangles representing Fe?.i-bearing samples with Si +
Al > 8 are intermixed with the circles for Al-deficient
(Si + Al < 8) Fe:* samples(exceptfor the clintonite data,
SrnucruruL
106
;j
5
\<
to
.9
g,
C
olo
.{t
6
o
o
ada
6
!
tt
c,
o
9
3
o
o
o
I
o
o.2
o.4
o.6 o.8
o
o
1.2
N
Cations Fer3j,
Fig.3. Si/Al ratiovs.Fel"fcationsfor samples
whereFe|f >
0. Trianglesrepresent
datafor sampleswhereSi + Al > 8, and
circlesrepresent
Al-deficientmicas.The five lowesttrianglesare
clintonitedatafrom Annerstenand Olesch(1974).
which have Si/Al < l). If Si/Al ratio does not control
Fel"l in non-Al-deficient samples,what does?
Annersten and Olesch (1978) postulated that the effect
of Ca in the interlayer sites was to increasethe relative
size of the tetrahedra, making it possible for the larger
Fe3+cation to enter. As Figure 4 shows,the size of the A
site cations does not seemto correlate with Feli displacing Al. However, Figure 5 demonstrates that the phenomenon does occur when the averagesize of the octahedral cations is low (<0.68 A), implying an abundance
of 3+ and 4* cations in the octahedral sheet. Perhaps
small cation size can be correlated with the presenceof
octahedralvacancies(neededto charge-balancethe smaller, highly chargedcations) that would increasethe size of
the octahedral sheet and necessitateenlargement of the
1?
6
C
o
o
(J
o
o
o
o
.!
at,
o
ot
o
o
O
O.2
O.4
0.6
O.8
1
1.2
t4
Cations Fe3,l
Fig. 4. Average size ofthe A-site interlayer cations vs. Felj
content, with triangles representingsampleswith Si + Al > 8.
There is no apparent division between triangles and circles (Aldeficient micas).
o
o
o
o
o
o.5
o.2
o.4
o.8
CationsFefL
Fig. 5. Averagesizeof the octahedralcationsvs. Fel"fcontent.TrianglesrepresentsampleswhereSi + Al > 8. Note that
whenoctahedral-cation
sizeis lessthan -0.68 A, Fe'* substitutesat the tetrahedralpositionregardless
of how much AI is
present.
tetrahedra to allow a fit between layers. Enlarged tetrahedra could then easily accommodateFe3+cations.
ClrroN oRDERTNG
Crystal-structurerefinementis the standardmethod for
examination of cation ordering in micas; literature data
are summarized in Bailey (l98aa). He showed that tetrahedral cation ordering does occur (albeit infrequently)
rn mlcas.
On the other hand, octahedralcation ordering is more
common. Although early studies found little or no evidence for significant ordering of Mg and Fe in micas
(Goodman and Wilson, 1973; Hazen and Burnham,
1973),subsequentworkers have suggestedthat Fe'z+prefers M2 (Annersten, 1975), or M I (Levillain et al., 198l),
and that Fe2+in low-grade metamorphic biotites is orderedat M2 (Heller-Kallai and Rozenson,l98l) or Ml
(Annersten, 1974). Ohra et al. (1982) postulatedthat partial cation ordering of Fe3+atM2 may occur, but Fe2+is
randomly distributed over the two M2 and one Ml sites
in each unit cell.
The Miissbauer effect is of limited use in deciphering
site occupanciesin micas becauseit can only describethe
location of Fe cations in the structure. The data collected
in this study demonstrate that the ratio of Fe cations in
the crs-M2 : trans-Ml sitesis rarely 2:1. This suggeststhat
some cation ordering is occurring in the octahedralsheet.
It is tempting to assumethat only Fe and Mg are ordering; such an assumption would allow development of an
equilibrium constant for Fe-Mg exchangeat the two sites.
However, it is impossible to determine from Mdssbauer
data alone which of the many cations in the oclahedral
sheetsis ordering (especiallyin micas with such varied
compositions and parageneses).
As can be seenin Table l, the amount of Fe2+ordering
is not correlated with any of the single compositional
variableslisted, including Fe'z+/)Fe.An attempt was made
to correlate FeirllFeirl ratios with parageneseslisted in
Appendix Table 4; however there is not enough detailed
information to make a worthwhile comparison. A more
dedicatedstudy ofsample paragenesisvs. ordering ofcations among M2 and Ml sites, using a large number of
compositionally similar (and simpler) samples,is in progressto determine the systematicsof cation-ordering processes.In the context of this literature review, it can only
be said that the ratio of Fe2+at the M2 and Ml sites is
highly variable(from 0.70 to 5.14)and doesnot seemto
be a simple function of any singlecompositional variable,
including Fe2*/ZFe.
Sulrrtranv
This review of Mdssbauer studies of trioctahedral micas has three principal conclusions:
1. Typical valuesfor Miissbauerparametersof different
mica sitesare as follows:Fefr,n+r-D:
1.13,A,:2.58 mm/
s ; F e f l n j - d: l . l 2 a n d 1 . 1 6 ,A : 2 . 0 5 a n d 2 . 7 5 m m / s ;
F e f l r l - D : 0 . 4 0 ,A : 0 . 5 5 m m / s ;F e f l o + r - 6 : 0 . 4 A
0 ,: 1 . 0 0
mm/s; Felj-D:0.20, A: 0.50 mm/s. It is also noteworthy that no Mtissbauer evidence for a doublet representingintervalenceFe3+- Fe2*'delocalizedspecieshas
been found.
2. The effectsof composition on Mtissbauerparameters
seem to be minimal, although the addition of Li to the
octahedral sheet systematically affects quadrupole splitting of the Feflnjdoublet.
3. The addition of the Mdssbauersite-occupancydata
to compositional information shows that tetrahedral Al *
Fe3+substitution may be controlled by octahedralcation
size and that M2-Ml cation ordering is ubiquitous.
AcrNowr,nocMENTS
The authorthanksRogerBurnsand GeorgeRossman(and
grantsNSG-7601and EAR-8212540,
respectively)
for support
overdifferentperiodsofthis study.ScottPhillipsis alsogratefully acknowledged
for statisticaladviceand the multiple regresThoroughreviewsby FrankHawthorne,
sionprogram,sEARcH.
reviewercontributedgreatlyto
S.W. Bailey,andan anonymous
the final versionof this paper.
RnrrnrNcrs
Amirkhanov,Kh.I., Anokhina,L.K., Sardarov,S.S.,Murina,
G.A., and Gabitova,R.U. (1980)Absoluteageof Aldan and
(USSR)biotitesandphlogopites.
Slyudyanka
In L.N. Ovchinnikov, Ed. Vost Sib Dal'negoVostoka,p. 63-65.Izd Nauka,
Moscow.
Annersten,H. (1974)Mijssbauerstudiesof natural biotites.
AmericanMineralogist,
59, 143-15l.
-(1975)
Mdssbauer
studyof iron in naturaland synthetic
biotites.Fortschritteder Mineralogie,52, 583-590.
Annersten,H., and Olesch,M. (1978)Distributionof ferrous
and ferric iron in clintonite and the Miissbauercharacteristics
offerric iron in tetrahedralcoordination.CanadianMineralogist,16, 199-203.
Annersten,
H., Devanarganan,
S.,Haggstrom,
L., andWappling,
R. (1971) Mdssbauerstudy of syntheticferri-phlogopite
KMgrFe3+SirO,o(OH),.
PhysicaStatusSolidi, B48, K137Kl38.
t07
Astakhov. A.V., Voitkovskii, Y.B., Genralov, O.N., and Sidorov, S.V. (1975) NGR investigation of some lamellar and boron-containing silicates.Kristallograpfiya, 20, 769-7 74.
Bagin, V.I., Gendler, T.S., Dainyak, L.G., and Kuzmin, R.N.
(1980) M<issbauer,thermomagneticand X-ray study of cation
ordering and high temperaturedecompositionin biotite. Clays
and Clay Minerals,28, 188-196.
Bailey, S.W. (1984a) Crystal chemistry of the true micas. MineralogicalSocietyof America Reviews in Mineralogy, 13, I 360.
-(1984b)
Review of cation ordering in micas. Clays and
Clay Minerals, 32, 8l-92.
Bancroft, G.M., and Brown, J.R. (1975) A Mdssbauerstudy of
coexisting hornblendes and biotites: Quantitative Fe3+/Fez+
ratios. American Mineralogist, 60, 265-27 2.
Bancroft, G.M., Sham,T.K., Riddle, C., Smith, T.E., and Turek,
A. (1977\ Ferric/ferrous-iron ratios in bulk rock samplesby
Mcissbauerspectroscopy:The determination of standardrock
samplesG2, GA, Wl, and mica Fe. Chemical Geology, 19,
277-284.
Bowen,L.H., Weed, S.B.,and Stevens,J.G. (1969) Mtissbauer
study of micas and their potassium-depletedproducts. American Mineralogist, 54, 72-84.
Burns, R.G. (1981) Intervalence transitions in mixed-valence
minerals of iron and titanium. Annual Reviews of Earth and
Planetary Science,9, 354-377.
Chandra, Ramesh,and Lokanathan, S. (1977) Electric field gradient in biotite mica. Physica Status Solidi, b,83,273-280.
Chandra, Usha, and Lokanathan, S. (1982) A Miissbauer study
of the effect of heat treatment on biotite micas. Journal of
PhysicsD: Applied Physics, 15,2331-2340.
Dawson, J.B., and Smith, J.V. (1977) The MARID (mica-amphibole-rutile-ilmenite-diopside)suite of xenoliths in kimberlites. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 41,309-323.
Delaney, J.S., Smith, J.V., Carswell, D.A., and Dawson, J.B.
(1980) Chemistry of micas from kimberlites and xenoliths. II.
Primary- and secondary-texturedmicas from periodotite xenoliths. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 44,857-872.
Dodge, F.C.W., Smith, V.C., and Mays, R.E. (1969) Biotites
from granitic rocks of the central Sierra Nevada batholith,
California. Journal of Petrology, I 0, part 2, 250-27 l.
Drago, V., Baggio-Saitovitch,E., and Danon, J. (1977) M0ssbauer spectroscopy of electron-irradiated natural layered silicates.Journal of Inorganic and Nuclear Chemistry, 39,9'13979.
Dyar, M.D. (1984) Precisionand interlaboratory reproducibility
of measurementsof the Mdssbauereffect in minerals. American Mineralogist,69, I127-1144.
Ericsson,T., Wappling, R., and Punakivi, K. (1977) Mdssbauer
spectroscopyapplied to clay and related minerals. Geologiska
ForeningensI Stockholm Forhandlingar, 99, 229-245.
Foster, M.D. (1960) Interpretation of the composition of trioctahedral micas. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper
354-B.
Gendler, T.S., Daynyak, L.G., and Kuzmin, R.N. (1978) Parameters of the M<issbauerspectrum of Fe3* ions in biotite and
continuity ofbiotite-oxybiotite transition at 300-900 K. Geochemistry International, 15, 17-22.
Gettys, W.L., and Stevens,J.G. (1981) Debye model calculation
of secondorder Doppler shifts. In J.W. Robinson, Ed. Handbook ofspectroscopy III, p. 496. CRC, Boca Raton, Florida'
Gilkes, R.J., Young, R.C., and Quirk, J.P. (1972) The oxidation
of octahedral iron in biotite. Clays and Clay Minerals, 20,
303-3l 5.
Goncharov,G.N., Moskvin, L.N., and Tomilov, S.B.(1971)Use
of nuclear physical methods for studying the principles of the
metasomatic substitution of siderophyllite. Prikl Yad Spektrosk,no. 2,62-67.
Goodman, B.A., and Wilson, M.J. (1973) A study of the weathering of biotite using the Mdssbauer efect. Mineralogical Magazine.39. 448-454.
108
Guggenheim,Stephen.(1984) The brittle micas. Mineralogical
Societyof America Reviewsin Mineralogy,13, 6l-104.
Guidotti, C.V. (1984) Micas in metamorphic rocks. Mineralogical Society of America Reviews in Mineralogy, l3, 357-467.
Haggstrom,L., Wappling, R., and Annersten, H. (1969a)Mdssbauer study ofiron-rich biotites. Chemical PhysicsLetters, 4,
107-108.
-(1969b)
Mrissbauer study of oxidized iron silicate minerals.PhysicaStatusSolidi, 33,741-748.
Hazen,R.W., and Wones,D.R. (1972)The effectof cation substitutions on the physical properties of trioctahedral micas.
American Mineralogist, 57, 103-129.
Heller-Kallai,L., and Rozenson,I. (1981)The useof Mossbauer
spectroscopyof iron in clay mineralogy. Physics and Chemistry of Minerals,7, 223-238.
Hogarth, D.D., Brown, F.F., and Pritchard,A.M. (1970)Biabsorption, M<issbauerspectra, and chemical investigation of
five phlogopite samplesfrom Quebec.Canadian Mineralogist,
r0, 7 10-722.
Hogg, C.S., and Meads, R.E. (1970) The Mcissbauerspectra of
several micas and related minerals. Mineralogical Magazine,
3'.1,606-614.
-(1975)
A Mossbauerstudy of thermal decompositionof
biotites. Mineralogical Magazine, 40, 79-88.
Huggins, F.E. (1976) Mossbauerstudies of iron minerals under
pressuresof up to 200 kbars. In R.G.J. Strens,Ed. The physics
and chemistry of minerals and rocks, p. 613-640. Wiley, New
York.
Ishida, K., and Hirowatari, F. (1980) On the chemical composition and Mdssbauer spectraof manganoanphlogopite with
reversepleochroism. Kobutsugaku Zasshi, 14 (Tokubet sugo
3),5+-61.
Ivanitskiy, V.P., Kalmechenko, A.M., Matyash, I.V., and Ihanyak, T.P. (1975a) Mossbauer and PMR studies of oxidation
and dehydroxylation in biotite. Geokhimiya, no. 12, 18641871.
Ivanitskiy, V.P., Matyash,I.V., and Rakovich, F.I. (1975b)Effectsof irradiation on the M<issbauerspectraof biotites. Geochemistry International, 12, l5l-157, from Geokhimiya, no.
6,850-856.
11975c)Mdssbauerspectraof iron in biotite near ore as
a prospectingcriterion for radioactive elements(in Russian).
Dopowidi Akademii Nauk Ukrains'koi RSR, ser. B, no. 3,
206-209.
Ivanitskiy, V.P., Kalinichenko, A.M., Matyash, I.V., Kudelya,
V.K., Zayats,A.P., and Shvets,D.I. (1977) On the influence
of gamma-radiation upon processesof oxidation, dehydroxylation and magneticpropertiesof some alumosilicates(in Russian). Geokhimia, no. 8, 237-245.
Ivanitskiy, V.P., Kalinichenko, A.M., Matyash,I.V., Shvets,D.I.,
and Batievskii, B.A. (1978) Distribution of octahedralcations
as an index of the radiation stability ofbiotites (in Russian).
Konstitutsiya i Svoistva Mineralov, 12, 47-54.
Kohno, T., and Kakitani, S. (1972) Weathering alteration and
the variation of Mdssbauerspectrafor biotites (in Japanese).
ZobutsugakuZasshi, 10, 499-506.
Lefelhocz,J.F., Friedel,R.A., and Kohman, T.P. (1967)Mossbauer spectroscopyof iron in coal. Geochimica et CosmochimicaActa, 31, 2261-2273.
Levillain, Christian, Maurel, Pierre, and Menil, Francis. (1977)
Localisation du fer, par voie chimique et par spectrom6trie
Mdssbauer,dans la lefidolite du granite de Beavoir (Massif
central frangais).Bulletin de la Soci6t6Frangaisede Min6ralogie et de Cristallographie,100, 137-142.
-(1981)
M0ssbauerstudies of synthetic and natural micas
on the polylithiorite-siderophyllite join. Physicsand Chemistry of Minerals,7,7l-76.
Manapov, R.A., and Krinari, G.A. (1976) Gamma-resonance
spectroscopyof layer silicates and some problems of their
crystal chemistry. In Vinokurov, V.M., Ed. Fiz Svoistva Min-
Kazan Universiteta, Kaer Gorn Porod, p. ll}-l22.Izdatja
zan.
Manapov, R.A., and Sitdikov, B.S. (1974) Mtissbauerspectroscopic study of biotites of metamorphic rocks of the Tatar
Arch Precambrianbasement.GeochemistryInternational, I l,
976-980.
Marfunin, A.S., Mkrtchyan, A.R., Nadzharyan, G.N., Nyussik,
YaM., and Platonov, A.N. (1971) Optical and Miissbauer
spectraofiron in some layeredsilicates(in Russian).Izvestiya
Akademii Nauk AzerbaidzhanskoiSSR, SeriyaGeologo-Geo'7
graficheskikh, , 87-93.
Mineeva, R.M. (1978) Relationship betweenM<issbauerspectra
and defect structure in biotites from electric field gradient calculations.Physicsand Chemistryof Minerals,2,267-277.
Miyano, T., and Miyano, S. (1982) Ferri-annite from the Dales
Gorge Member iron-formations, Wittenoon area, Western
Australia. American Mineralogist, 67, 1179-l 194.
Nolet, D.A., and Burns, R.G. (1979) Ilvaite: A study of temperature dependentelectron delocalization by the Mossbauereffect. Physicsand Chemistryof Minerals,4,221J34.
Ohta, T., Takeda,H., and Tak6uchi, Y. (1982) Mica polytypism:
Similarities in the crystal structuresof coexisting lM and 2M'
oxybiotite. American Mineralogist, 67, 298-310.
Pollak, H., and Bruyneel,W. (1974) Sautd'electronset le rapport
Fe2+/Fe3+dans deux silicates.Journal de Physique,Colloque,
66.35.571-574.
Pollak, H., DeCoster,M., and Amelinckx, S. (1962)Mossbauer
effectin biotite. PhysicaStatusSolidi, 2, 1653-1659.
Pol'shin, E.V., Matyash, I.V., Tepikin, V.E., and Ivanitskii, V,P.
(1972) Mossbauereffecton Fe57nuclei in biotite. Soviet Physics. Crystallography, 17, 2'78-280.
Rice, C.M., and Williams, J.M. (1969) A M<issbauerstudy of
biotite weathering.Mineralogical Magazine, 37, 2lL2l5.
Robbins, D.W., and Strens,R.G.J. (1972) Charye-transferin ferromagnesian silicates: The polarized electronic spectra of
trioctahedral micas. Mineralogical Magazine, 38, 55l-563.
Sanz,J., Meyers,J., Vielvoye,L., and Stone,W.E.E.(1978)The
location and content of iron in natural biotites and phlogopites: A comparison of several methods. Clay Minerals, 13,
45-52.
Shannon,R.D. (1976) Rewisedefective ionic radii and systematic studies ofinteratomic distancesin halide and chalcogen432,751-76'l .
ides.Acta Crystallographica,
Shinno, I., and Suwa, K. (1981) M<issbauerspectrum and polytype of phlogopite with reversepleochroism. Preliminary Reports on African Studies(Nagoya University), 6, l5 1-157.
Smith, G. (1978) Evidence for absorption by exchange-coupled
Fe2+-Fe3+pairs in the near infrared spectraofminerals. Physics and Chemistryof Minerals,3, 375-383.
Smith, G., Howes, B., and Hazen, Z. (1980) Mtissbauer and
optical spectra of biotite: A case for Fe2+-Fe3+interactions.
PhysicaStatusSolidi (a), 57, Kl87-K192.
Taylor, G.L., Ruotsala,A.P., and Keeling,R.O. (1968)Analysis
of iron in layer silicatesby Mtissbauerspectroscopy.Clays and
Clay Minerals,16, 381-391.
Tricker, M.J.. Winterbottom, A.P., and Freeman, A.G. (1976)
Iron-57 conversion-electronM<issbauerspectroscopicstudy of
the initial stagesof the oxidation of biotite. Journal of the
Chemical Society,Dalton Transaction, 1289-1292.
Tripathi, R.P., and Lokanathan, S. (1978) M<issbauerstudy of
Mg and Mn-rich amphiboles and micas. Indian Journal of
Pure and Applied Physics,16, 888-892.
-(1982)
Mtissbauer study of layered silicates minerals of
Indian origin. Indian Journal ofPure and Applied Physics,20,
346-352.
Tripathi, R.P., Chandra, U., Chandra, R., and Lokanathan, S.
(1978) A Mrissbauer study of the effects of heating biotite,
phlogopite,and vermiculite. Journal oflnorganic and Nuclear
Chemistry, 40, 1293-1298.
Vertes,A., Jonas,K., Czako-Nagy,I., and Nemecz,E. (1981)A
DYAR: MOSSBAUER DATA ON TRIOCTAHEDRAL MICAS
109
combined application of Mcissbauerspectroscopyand chemical transformation for chemical analysis.Radiochemical and
Radioanalytical Letters, 48, 93-l 00.
Voitovsky, Y.B., Gendler, T.S., Dainyak, L.G., and Kuzmin,
R.N. (1975) Phasetransformations under oxidation and decomposition of biotite. International Conference on Mtjssbauer SpectroscopyProceedings,1, 387-388.
Weiss,2., Rieder, M., Chmielova,M., and Krajicek, J. (1985)
Geometry of the octahedral coordination in micas: A review
of refined structures.American Mineralogist, 70, 747-7 57.
Whipple, E.R. (1974) Quantitative Mijssbauer spectra and
chemistry of iron. Ph.D. thesis, MassachusettsInstitute of
Technology,Cambridge.
Yassoglov, N.J., Nobeli, C., Kostikas, A.J., and Simopoulos,
A,.C.(1912) Weatheringof mica flakesin two soils in northem
Greeceevaluatedby Mtissbauerand conventional techniques.
Soil ScienceSociety ofAmerica, Proceedings,36, 520-527.
AppendixTable 1. Referencesused in plots and tables
AppendixTable 2. Sampleorigins
1
2-3
4
o-/
8
I
10
11-13
14-20
21
22-23
24-25
25-33
34-35
36-41
42
43-45
46
47-53
54-58
59-63
64-71
72-84
85
86
87
Voitovskyet al., 1975
Shinno and Suwa,
1981
Leviflainet al.,1977
fvanitskiyet al.,1977
lshidaand Hirowatari,
1980
Goncharovet al.,
1971
Baginet al., 1980
Annersten,1975
B o w e ne t a l . , 1 9 6 9
Bancroft and Brown,
1975.
Rice and Williams,
1969
Haggstrom et al.,
1969a
lvanitskiyet al., 1975a
Sanz et al., 1978
lvanitskiyet al., 1975b
Annersten,1974
Smithet al., 1980"Hogg and Meads,
1970
Hogg and Meads,
1975
Manaoov and Sitdikov,1974
Hogarthet al., 1970
Annersten and
Olesch,1978
Levillainet al., 1981
Dyar,unpublished
data
Astakhovet al., 1975
Hetzenberget al.,
1968
Annerstenet al.. 1971
88
89
90-92
93-96
97-102
103-104
105
106-108
109
110
111
112
113
114-115
116-117
118-119
12O
121
122
127
12U129
130-132
133
134-144
145
146-151
" Analysesfrom Dodgeet al., 1969
.. Analysesfrom Smith,1978.
Huggins,1976
Marfuninet al., 197.1
Trioathi and Lokanathan,1978
Tayloret al., 1968
Amkkhanovet al., 1980
TriDathiet al.. 1978
Goodmanand Wilson.
1973
Haggstromet al.,
1969b
Yassoglovet al., 1972
Trickeret al., 1976
Bancroftet al., 1977
Chandra and Lokanathan,1982
Chandraand Lokanathan, 1977
Dragoet al., 1977
Ericssonet al., 1977
G e n d l e r e ta l . , 1 9 7 8
lvanitskiyet al., 1975c
lvanitskiyet al., 1978
Kohnoand Kakitani.
1972
Lefelhoczet al., 1967
Manapov and Krinari,
1976
Pollaket al., 1962
Pollakand Bruyneel,
1974
Pol'shinet al ,1972
Verteset al., 1981
Trioathiand Lokanathan,1982
Mem;scnrrr REcETvED
Julv 29, 1985
Mewuscnrpr AccEprEDSerreuprn 2, 1986
Massif Central Frangais
metasomatic(ore deposit)
monzonite,Sierra Nevada batholith
granodiorites,Sierra Nevada batholith
Bosahan quarry, Falmouth,England
adjacent to uranium ore
high amphibolitefacies, gneiss SW Greenland
low amphibolitefacies, gneiss SW Greenland
Revsundgranite, Sweden
charnockite(granulitefacies)Varberg, Sweden
metamorphosediron formation, Sweden
titano-ferrousmetadiabase,Nordingrd,Sweden
granites, SW England
granulitefacies, 2 px-plag mesocratic schist
granulitefacies, gn-hypersthenegneiss with gn-bi-sillbands
granulitefacies, silicifiedgn-bi-silgn
granulitefacies,garnet-biotiteplagiogneiss
amphibolitefacies, gn-bi-hb metadiorite
amphibolitefacies, gn-bi gneiss
amphibolitefacies, biotite plagiogranite
intrusivecarbonates,Gatineauregion, Quebec
phlogopite-calcite,px vein dikes
clintonitewith fassaite, grossularite,spinel, perovskite
clintonitewith tassaite, grossularite,calcite, clinochlore,magnetite
61
clintonite with fassaite, pargasite,chondrodite,calcite, spinel,graphite
clintonitewith fassaite, calcite, monticellite:contact marble
62
monzonite,Sierra Nevada batholith (same as 15)
72
granodiorite,Sierra Nevada batholith (same as 16)
73
74
76
Pikes Peak granite
Lost Creek, Montana granite
78
Cape Ann granite
79
banded iron tormation, with riebeckite,hem, mag, qtz, ank,
stil
banded iron formation, hematite, riebeckite,low grade
80
banded iron formation, "higher grade"
81
83-84 garnet, sillimanite,muscovite,quartz, plagioclase,rutile
94,96 banded iron formation, Marquette lron Range
granodiorite,Nova Scotia
111
1 1 8 - 1 1 9pegmatitesof Ukrainianshield
4
8
14
15-20
21
34-35
36
37
38
39
40
41
43-46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54-55
56-58
59
60
110
data
Appendix
Table3. Compositions
andMossbauer
108
Sample #
si4*
At3*
Fe3+
S u mT e t
5.50
z.o4
0.46
8.00
At
Ti..
].zB
0.22 0.01
FeJr
Mq
F;2*
Itln
Li
0the.
Sun oct
0.00
2.10
2.36
0 .04
0.00
Na
K
0the.
Sun A
61
A1
6.00
5.89 5.99
1.76 1,68
0.32 0.28
7, 9 7 1. 9 5
7.00 5.14
0,98 2.86
0.02
8,00 8,00
2. 4 4
0.03
| .12
2.62 2.65
1. t 7
| .r2
2.65
-
1 .1 6 1 . 2 0
2,62 2.86
I .17
l.l8
2.99 2.29
0.43
AI
Ti
F e3 +
t1a
ri2,
Mn
LI
0the.
Sum Oct
0.25
0.35
0.84
0.96
1.91
0.60 0.58
-
61
A1
AZ
A3
64
64
0.88
2.t4
234
6.00
t3P
1. 0 4 3 . 0 0 0 . 9 6 1, 3 4
0.20
0.28 0.10
0,00 0.16 0.28 0.48
2.02 1.78 0.48
2.16 4.34 2.22 2.90
0.02
0.90
0.14
0.1.6
4.04
0.58
-
0.42 0.24 0.67
0.29 0.29 0.35
0.42 0.48 0 . 4 4
2.45 2.64 r.22
2.12 2.02 2.1A
0.05 0.05 0.14
0,76
0.36
0.17
L56
2.74
0.06
0.36
0.19
0.39
2.73
1.89
0.05
0.48
0,18
0,49
2.53
t.91
0.11
5.44 6.00
5.82
5.75 5.12
5.65
5.61
5,76
5.52
5.30
5.60
0,42
0,32
0.42
2.17
2.38
0.04
1.56
0.28
0.00
l.l5
2.34
0.03
5.75
5.36
0.03
0,06 0.12 0.07
1, 8 0 1 . 6 2 I . 8 4
0 . 0 9 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 .I 0 0 . 0 9
0 . 0 6 0 . 15 0 , 1 3 0 . 0 7 0 . 0 9
1.63 1.86 1.85 1.63 I.61
0 . 0 9 0.00
0,08 0.10
1,71 1.16
2.00
2.00
1.86
7.73 2,01
l.13 1,17 1.19
2.52 2.52 2,58
l.19
2.13
0.34
1.02
l.13
2.54
l.18
2.00
0.40
0.76
1.11 r.t2
2.47 2.51
0.26
0,62
0.15
0.63
0.00
0.50
-
1.11
2.44
0.54 0.54 0.44
0.60 0.80 0.90
t.t2
2.62
1.10
2.13
0.46
1.00
0.45
0.42
1.13
2.62
1.10
2.15
0.47
r.05
0.49
0.50
0.89
0.83
0.81
1.13
2.57
I.11
2.06
0,48
r.00
0.52
0.47
1.80
1.19
1.94
1.86
1.14
2,62
t.l3
2.15
0.60
0.57
l.13
2,65
1.09
2.20
0.49
r.03
0.49
0.52
l,l2
2.61
I.09
2,17
0.49
I.00
0.48
0,52
1.13
2.61
1.ll
2.14
0.51
1.05
0.51
0.51
I .14
2.56
l l5
2.63
0.94
0.83 0.81
0.85
0.14
r.23
1.00 0.79
27P
0.96
0.86
0.78
408
3lB
8.00
8.00
8.00
8.00
8.00
0.36
0.23
0.50
2.30
2.11
0.02
0.18
0.40
t.2t
0.46
2,95
0.05
0,00
0.67
0.38
2,27
2, 3 1
0.01
0.00 0.00 0.88
0.12 0.65 0.16
0 . 13 2 . 0 6 0 . 7 3
4.30 0.52 2.34
1. 2 7 3 . 3 6 I . 5 4
0.05 0.03 0.08
5.31
5.52
5.25
5,64
5.87
0.17
1.82
1.78
1,73
I.89
1.89
1.79
t.78
I.76
t.92
1.90
1.84
1.60 1.89
1.18
2.66
l.l8
2.r8
0.50
1.11
0.52
0.64
1.06
2.56
1.03
2.r0
0.41
r.02
0.43
0.50
I.07
2.62
1.05
2.19
0,50
0.12
0.52
0.57
I.06
2,60
I.01
2.20
0.43
0.93
0.40
0.50
1.06
2.56
1.02
2.13
0.41
0.74
0.39
0.57
1.05
2.58
1.03
2,21
0.51
1 ,l 7
0.46
0.65
1.05
2.57
1.05
2.12
0.50
0.88
0.54
0.34
1.04
2.60
1 01
2.23
0.48
0.78
0.46
0.32
0.81
0.80
0.il
1.64
0.86
1.39
0,9l
0.75
0.62
l.3I
0.68
2.09
5.39
5.28 5.59
2,13 2.41 2.15 2.6t
8.00
8.00
8.00
8.00
8.01
8.00
8.00
0.50 1.20
0,34 0.26
0.09 0.34
2.16 0.92
2.52 2.48
0,06 0.08
0.04 0.38
0.36
0.10
0.02
5.10
0.32
0.01
0.12
0.04 0.12 0,10
0.03 0.06 1.52
5.46 5.36 3.73
0.34 0.32 0,27
o.02
0.02
0.03
0.86
0.25
0.46
1.61
2.04
0.02
0.33
0.37
0,32
2.39
1.94
0.02
6.04
5.64
5.24
0.03 0.I0 0.06 0.02 0.04
0 . 10 0 . 1 2 0 . 0 8 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 8
1 . 8 8 1 . 7 0 1 . 9 0 1 . 9 0 r . 74
6.I I
1.82
6.08
t.92
5.68
2.32
5,42
2.58
5.48
2.52
8.00
8.00
8.00
8.00
8.00
8.00
8.00
8.00
0,02 2.00
0.46
0.75 1.95
0.48
3.97 4.05
0.05
0.62
0.21
0.41
2.07
2.4a
1.60 0.18
0.34
0,60 0.04
r.60 3.80
2.00 1.50
0.02
0. 1 8
0.08
0.26
0.09
3.20
2,08
0.10
0.10
0.18
0.26
0.18
2.04
2.88
0.08
0.08
5.73 6.00
5.78 5.80 6.06
5.91
5.70
5.71
1. 8 8
2.00
0.20
I .80
0.16
0.20 0.14
1, 8 0 1. 8 8
0.02
0.18
I .88
0.04 0.04
0.12 0.06
1, 9 6 1 . 8 6
1. 8 8
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.18
2.08
2.1.2 1,96 2.Ol
1.92 2.04
1.94
1.86
1.13
2.36
1.11
2,17
0.55
0.55
1,15
2,56
l.ll
2.18
0,54
0,52
1.14
2.6t
l.13
2.10
0.46
0.85
I.15
2.66
1.14
2.29
0.46
1,00
1.14
2.61
t.t2
?.20
0.54
0.60
1.15
2.60
I.10
2.16
0.57
0.56
1.14
2.60
l.l0
2. 1 . 7
0.50
0.69
t.t2 | .12
2.56 2.60
|,r2 I .13
2.22 2,20
0.6I 0.6I
0.98 0.97
I .13
2,65
1.19
2.66
1.18
2.28
0.54
0.76
1.15
2.66
1.12
2. 2 3
0.51
0.65
5.66 5.91
l.13
2.59
t.12
2.1,7
0.49
0.60
5.86
418
5.44
2.56
0,00
6.00
L. 7 6
0.24
5.60
2.40
0.17
5.45 5.92 5.20
2,35 2.05 2.33
0.20 0.03 0.47
6.00
2.00
5.60
2.40
-0,03
0.24
5.50
2.50
5.48
2.52
6.00
2,00
8.00
0.00
l 60
0.26
0.45
A5
Fez+/rFe^ 0.84
M2/MF
l e" 2.78
2IB
178
L5B
5.34 4.50 5.10 4.96 5.r2 5.60 5.53 5.42 5.37 5.63 5.52 5,62 5.29
2 .l 0 3 . 5 0 2 , 9 0 3 , 0 4 2 . 8 8 2 . 4 0 2 . 4 1 2 . 5 8 2 . 6 3 2 . 3 1 2 . 4 8 2 . 3 8 2 . 2 2
0.49
0,56
8,00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00
5.63
2.37
NA
0ther
Sun A
0.60
-
128
0,10
0.08
0.10 1.80 2.O0 I .70
0.46
0.62
0.20 0.20 0.24
r .23 0.52 0.47
Sample #
si 4+
Al3*
Fe3+
othe.
Sun Tet
4.80
0.60
0 .l 0 0 . o 2 0 . 0 1
0,12
0 . 1 0 0 .I 0 0 , 0 I 0 . 1 0 0 . 2 2 0 . 4 0
1.90 1.90 2.01 t,74 1.54 1.60 1.80 2,40
R b0 . 1 6
2,10 2.02 2.03 2.00 1.88 2.00 1.80 2.40
a3
64
A4
Fe2+/:Fe
H2/Ml Fez+
6,20 6.00
1.40 2,00
0.40 8.00 8.00
0.62
0.24
0,00 0.34 0.20
5.52 5.49 0.02 1.90 3.40 5.00
0.48 0.39 o.42 2,60
0.40
0.01
0.05 0.02 2.00 0.60
t,50
- Cr 0.0I
- 8a 0,20
6.02 5.92 6.00 5.72 5,80 6.00
62
l5
5.40
2.20
0.20
8,00
118
0.68
1.58
0.86
1.96
0.i8
2.00
0.90
o.74 0.88
0 . 8 2 0 . 8 9 0 . 9 6 0.88
1.15 1.19 r.35 0,70
0.88
1.00
0.71 0.8/ 0.79 0,86
1 . 0 0 2 . 1 1 2 , 0 4 1, 0 3
ul
DYAR: MOSSBAUER DATA ON TRIOCTAHEDRAL MICAS
Appendix T able 3.- Continued
S a n p le #
43P
452
418
498
si4+
A rl *
5.60 5.30 6.92 5.88 5.51 5.35 5.25
z . 4 o 2 . 1 0 1 . 0 8 2 . 1 2 2, 4 9 2 . 4 1 2 . 5 6
8.00
8.00 8.00
8.00
A]
TJ
Fe3+
Mq
F;2+
Mn
L1
0ther
Sum oct
0.16
0.23
0.03
5,07
0.37
0.00
0.39
0.38
0.54
2,18
2.05
0.00
-
re-'
S u mT e t
NA
0ther
sum A
2.31
0.03
0.09
0.04
0.66
0.68
2.29
0.I8
8.00
0.20 8.00 8.00
5 .1 4
2.77
0.09
8.00
1.81
0.04
0.24
0.I1
2, t 4
0.04
0.91
0.11
0.48
0.21
2,70
2, 1 8
0.02
0.52
0.41
0.05
3.22
1. 4 r
0.00
1.09
0.18
0.19
2.01
2.77
0.01
0.00
0.44
[J.54
1,94
2 . 76
0.03
5. 7 0
5.67
5.65
63C
8.00
5.38 5.96 6.10
2.62 1.69 1.83
0.29 0.07
8.00 7,94 8.00
5.65 5.69 5.61 2.4). 2.4\ 2.73 2.35 2.23
2.08 2.30 2.34 5.49 5.41 5.27 5.38 5.25
0.27 0.52
0,21 0.01 0.01 0.I0
8 . 0 0 8 . 0 0 8 . 0 0 8 . 0 0 8 . 0 0 8 . 0 0 8.00 8.00
0.55
0.27
0.40
2.31
2.t3
0.01
0.30
0.21
0.33
2.61
2.t6
0.04
0,00
0.12
0.22
5.19
0.16
0.0I
5, 2 3
2.71
0.00
0.02
0.00
5.59
0.49
0.0I
0.00
0.02
0.05
5.13
0.69
0.00
0.00
0.15
0 . 16
4,25
1.04
0.01
0.00
0.13
0.14
5.31
0.15
0.00
1.44
1.53 l.13
0.00 0.03
4 . 4 2 4, 3 9
0.10 0.07
1.70 r.40
0.00 0.03 0.08
4 . 8 0 4 . 2 0 4. 4 5
0.17 0.05 0.00
5.54 6.10 5.29
5.89
5.70
5.61 5.73
5.98
5.93
0.19 0.02 0.21 0.05 0.07 0.03 0.03
0.14 0.07 0.10 0.02 0.01 0,08 0.05
1.46 I.83 1.80 r.69 1.64 1.66 t.16
0.20 0.03
0.03 0.02
1.58 t,78
0.09 0.03
0.04 0.13
i.83 1.80
0.01
0.13
1.88
0.00
0.67
t.82
0.00 0.00 1.99 1.98
0.86 0.63 o,24 0.00
1. 7 8 1 . 8 9 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0
1.96 t.97
0.02 0.00
0.00 0.00
2.23
0.00
0.00
1. 9 8
2,23
r.l9
t.92
r ,01
2.stt
1.06
2,14
0.39
0 ./ 2
1. 1 5 1 . 1 3
2,65 2.44
Fe2+/rFe^
Mzll4l Fez'
o.90
1.65
S a m pel #
0.40
0.89
1. 1 3
2.14
0.38
0.83
1.16
1.09
2.r9
0.63
0.64
0.38
0.57
5.71 5.73
1, 1 7
1.84
1.81 1.83 1.96 r.96
2,02
2.49
2.64
2.52
2.25 1.98
1.15
2.65
i.13
2.t8
0.63
0.64
1.15
2.62
r.14
2,19
0.60
0.57
1.13
2.51
r.12
2,11
0.63
0.78
1.19
2,16
1.29
2.95
0.64
1.22
1.14
2.62
t.24
2.82
0,53
0.94
1.17
2.79
r.28
3.01
0.54
1.15
1.15
2.76
1.14
2,97
0.50
1.06
1.08
2.44
1.04
1 . 12
0.52
1.05
1.09
2.tt
0.52
1.20
0.06
0.50
0.13
0.36
0.21
o. 6 2
0.24
0.68
0.84
?.19
0.85
I .93
0.35
4.63
0.26
-
652
661
61t
68S
5.39
2.6t
5.67
2.33
4.98
3.02
5.14
2.86
5.19
2.8r
8.00
8.00
8.00
0.83
1. s 4
0,10
0,43
0.82
2. 1 5
0.83 0.80
2 . 0 4 1. 9 6
5.47
2.53
5.49
2. 5 1
5.61
2.39
8.00 8.00
8.00
8,00
2.35 2.29 2.16 2.24 2.18 1.84
0 . 3 3 0 . 0 3 0 .1 6 0 - 2 6 0 . 2 r
r.qu t-.25 2-,55 Z.re 2J3 3 . 9 6
2 . 0 9 2 . 0 4 1. 3 0 1 . 3 1 r - 2 5 0 . 0 0
0.40
0.18
0.66
2.51
1.78
0.11
0.23
0,32
0.5i
2. 1 2
2.16
0.04
6.OJ 5.91
u.oq
5-.44 s.sg
A]
TJ
Fe3+
M0
2 . 1 3 2. 4 2
0.00 0.18
6.04
5.89
5.82 o.Or
1.18
2.76
1.28
2.97
-
0.19 0,21
0.44 0.44
3.99
4.01
8.00 8.00
6.09
2, 6 1
1.Il
2.21
0.60
0.57
0.35
0-50
738
8.00
3.53 ?.09
t.t3
2,65
1.10
2.22
0.60
0.57
728
5.68
2.32
6.02 6.10
1.13
2.44
1.r0
2.01
0.59
0.57
0.80
I .20
0.45 r.58
6.tl
1.72
0.89
3.50
7.40
0.60
0.00
2.21
0.83
_
o,8I
1-24
si4*
At3*
F e3 +
Sum Tet
6l
^1
62
A2
63
a3
64
A4
65
A5
61C
5.86
I .10
2.56
1.08
2.24
0.47
0.80
0t her
Sun A
0.68
0.23
0.35
2.15
2.30
0.04
57P
0,07
0,36
1.55
1.98
NA
5 . 11
2,89
8.00
6t
^1
62
A2
63
A3
64
A4
65
A5
Mn
LT
0t her
Sum oct
518
0.14
0.86
0.82
0.94 0.81
-
/18
1. 9 7
1.13 1.08
2, 4 6 2 . 3 9
1.15
1.85
-
0.26
0.65
0.49
1.08
0.24
0.80
1.00 0.24
3.23
81A
83B
8.00
5.49
2.51
_
8.00
5.s6
2.29
0.15
8.00
5.86
r.84
0.30
8.00
5.49
2.15
0.36
8.00
6.06
1.94
0.85
8.00
6.51
0.18
1.31
8.00
5.85
1.05
1.10
8.00
5.94
1.59
0.41
8,00
0.34
0.19
0.62
2. 7 2
1.66
0.05
0.18
0.29
0.65
2.62
1.84
0.05
0.00
0.30
0.60
0.22
4,39
0.09
1.88
0.07
0.30
0.01
2.40
0,22
0.00
0.43
2.25
0.07
2.16
0.06
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0 . 3 0 0, 1 7
2,70 I .51
2.96 4.22
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.02
0, 2 4
0.11
4.11
0.00
0.00 0.81
0.01 0.16
0.30 0.37
5.r1 2.14
0.47 2.30
0.01 0.00
0.80
0.i6
0.26
2.t5
2.36
0.01
s.o:
s,oo
q.ge
4'.91 5.96
5.80
5.90 5.78
5.14
5.90
5.21
2,73
2.64
8.00
8.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.78 1.8r 2.02 1.90 2.05 2.02 t.gt
0.00 0.09 0.09
0.00 0.09 0.07
1.96 1.59 t.gz
0.10 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 o.t2 0.00
0.07 0.06 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.03
1.63 1.62 1.81 t,gl
1.66 1.61 1.40 2.06 1.9i
0.00 0.00
0.I0 0.08
1.56 1.69
1.78
1.Bl
2.02
r.90
2.05
2.C?
1.97
1.96
r.17
2.08
1.80
1.11
1.9r
2.O2
1.69
r.tz
7.47
2.18
1.94
I.66
t.77
1.17
2.63
1.18
2.96
I.13
2.42
1.13
2.71
1.17
2.51
1.18
2.90
0.40
0.61
-
1.14
2.66
1.15
2.93
0.42
0.88
0.38
0.54
1,16
2.36
1.15
2.69
r,11
2,5t
l.I7
2.83
0.38
0.69
-
L13
2.64
1.14
2.90
0.48
0.98
0.35
0.52
1.14
2.55
0.34
0.39
-
1.13
2.60
t.07
2.22
0.42
7.24
0.4r
0.55
1.13
2.51
1.10
2.12
0.39
1.16
0.44
0.47
1.13
2.60
1.07
2.15
0.41
r.16
0.39
0.52
1.12
2,58
1.09
2.t5
0.45
1.11
0.46
0.52
1.13
2.53
l.t0
2.06
0.43
0.99
0.39
0.31
1.14
2.68
1.10
2.36
0.34
0.74
1. 1 2
2.50
I .15
1.90
o.42
0.98
0.37
0.61
0.20
1.13
2. 6 7
1.r2
2.82
0.39
0.94
0.42
0.46
1.13
2.60
1.15
2.83
0.36
0.56
1.10 l ,t2
2.55 2.63
1.t6
2,16 0. 4 2
1.01 -
1. 1 4
2.63
1. 1 4
0.37
0.19
0.39
0.21
0.40
0.20
0.45
0.19
0.56
0.52
2.28
0,72
2,14
0.74
1.39
0.78
3.23
0.38
-
Fe2+/*e^ r.oo
M2/141
Fe.+ 4.88
0.11
0.15
1.00
1.56
0.91
1.43
0.79
r.21
0.00 0.93
r . 7 3 1. 5 3
0.89
1. 7 8
0 . 73
3.57
0 . 7 9 0 . 73
2 . 5 9 4. 2 ' l
0.74
2,70
0.BB
2.00
0.80
r.96
B:Bjotite
PrPhlogopile L:Lepidolite
S:Srderophylljte Z:Zinnualdjte A:Annite
C:Clintonjte
l 4 d s s b a u e rp a r a m e t e r s a r e c o r r e c t - A du s j n g s t a n d a r d v a l u e s o f
reference points as tdbulated by Gettys and Stevens (1gBl); data are quoted
relatjve to the mjdpointand velocjty
o
f
u
r
"
i
u
t
l
i
.
i
e
'
t
o
i
t
9;adient
spe.trur to uljor Jiruit-.omiartson ot a;1 results.
2.19
0.43
1.19
0.44
0.28
1.t4
2 .1 5
0.43
1.20
0.44
0.37
0.86
5.14
0.90
5.00
rt2
information
AppendixTable4. Datafrom paperswith no compositional
91P
S a m p l e#
6l
AI
A2
1.06
2.73
1.06
2.38
I.OB
3.13
A3
64
A4
a5
-1.001.41L.021
2.62 z,to
l.I5
2.20
0.31
0.36
0,49
1.32
0.17 0.19
0.50 0.57
Fe2+/*e^.
fr2/il\
Fe.'
61
AI
.09I.091'111.16
z'.ia
2.42 2.56
1.05 0.96
2.11 2.21
0.35 0.48
0.8/
I.11
0.49 o.rs
0.39 0.43
0.17
-
0.76
t,92
0.26
2.25
1.14I'111.101.11I.191.121
i.qs
2.50 2.66
,.io
i.ao
l.l0
2.21
0.39 0.39
0.95 0.95
0.45 0.51 0.41 0.36 0.56
0.50 0.60 0.30 0.30 0.69
Ez
Fez+lrFe^.
H2lMl Fe.'
1058
1068
1078
.|2
2.42
0'45
0'86
0'73
0.52 -
2.54
1'10
2'07
0'43
l'14
0'44
0'44
2.64
1'll
2'19
0'38
0'89
-
2.48
2.44
0'49
0'55
0'46
l'16
0.82
3.56
0.57
1,71
0.81
0.74
1.131.157
2.56 2.67
1.09 1.17
2'36 2'29
0.39
0.44
ll0B
ttlB
1128
1138
1t4B
1158
1168
1r7B
1188
1198
1208
l2lB
122G
1238
l24B
1258
1268
l21B
1288
1298
1308
1.04
2,02
0.43
0.91
0.42
0.52
l.1l
2.58
1.08
2.t5
0.43
0,71
-
1.11
2.53
1.08
I.98
0.5I
0.17
0.51
0.54
I .t1
2.54
I.10
2.O1
0.43
I.13
0.44
0.44
r.04
2.59
r.03
2.09
0.34
I.70
0.38
0.45
1. 0 8
2.63
1.07
2.22
r,t2
2.43
-
1 .l 1
2.58
1.08
L13
2.62
I.11
2.24
I.tl
2.61
t.12
2,t0
0.42
l.8l
o.42
0.52
1. 0 9
2.34
r.12 1,15
2 . 3 3 2.40
t.2r
2,51
1.25
2.53
0.36
0.70
0.37
0.71
1.13
2.57
1.12
2,1J
0.63
0.78
1.27
2.11
1.08
2.32
0.36 0.37
0.70 0.72
1.10
2,50
-
1.14
2.61
I.r3
2.21
0.57
0.71
1.19
2.58
1 .1 9
2.t3
0.14
1.23
1.13
2.60
1.09
2.23
-
1.12
2.56
1.10
2,09
0.60
0.71
0.48
0.46
0.54
0.59
0.47
0.57
-
0.10
0.43
0.60
0.57
0.25
0.50
0.70
3.13
0.83
0.83
0.82
2.15
0.80
1.96
l33B
1348
1358
0.38
0 . II
0.82
1.33
z.At
1.14
2.4t
1328
1.34
2.47
1.14
2.41
1.t2
2.66
1.13
2.20
0.40
0.96
64
a4
A5
l04B
1098
1318
6l
AI
.19|.|21.11
2.60 2.62
1.18 1.14
2-32 2.25
0.58
0.80
0.58 0.6I
0.57 0.60 -
l03B
l02B
1088
A5
'lr.rit'iiz,
^.|21
2.64
1.10
2.21
IOIB
I .18
2.48
8?
A3
64
A4
l0oB
931
0.13
0.54
l.l5
2.6t
1.11
2.16
I.1s
2.68
t.r2
2.22
0.91
t.22
0.89
2.30
0.86
1.45
1358
1378
1388
1398
1408
l41B
t42B
I43B
1448
1458
1468
1478
1488
1498
1508
15rB
1,15
2.61
1.15
2.22
1.16
2.70
l.11
2.26
1.16
2.70
1.14
2.24
1.16
2.65
1.13
2.r5
I.15
2.67
1.15
2.22
t.rl
2.60
1.ll
2.16
1.17
2.10
1.14
2.23
1.18
2.80
I.17
2.40
1.I9
2.54
1.14
2.20
1.13
2.56
1.01
2'20
1.00
2.55
L00
2.01
0.48
0.61
1.0s
2.51
1.02
2.24
0.43
l.I4
0.44
0.48
1.10
2.54
1.10
2.07
0.43
l.l1
2.58
1.13
2.02
0.44
0.48
1.10
2.54
1.08
2.16
0.34
].02
0.46
0.51
I .12
2.51
1.07
2.23
0.34
I .13
0.45
0.52
0.46
2.54
0.83
3.61
0.75
2.41
1.00
3.16
0.53
2.79
0.32
0.58
0.3s
2.45

the Scanned PDF - Mineralogical Society of America

Transcription

Similar documents