Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-29T03:21:19.765Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bernardevansite, Al2(Se4+O3)3⋅6H2O, dimorphous with alfredopetrovite and the Al-analogue of mandarinoite, from the El Dragón mine, Potosí, Bolivia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2023

Hexiong Yang*
Affiliation:
Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, 1040 E. 4th Street, Tucson, AZ 85721-0077, USA
Xiangping Gu
Affiliation:
School of Geosciences and Info-Physics, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410083, China
Robert A. Jenkins
Affiliation:
Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, 1040 E. 4th Street, Tucson, AZ 85721-0077, USA
Ronald B. Gibbs
Affiliation:
Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, 1040 E. 4th Street, Tucson, AZ 85721-0077, USA
Robert T. Downs
Affiliation:
Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, 1040 E. 4th Street, Tucson, AZ 85721-0077, USA
*
*Author for correspondence: Hexiong Yang, Email: hyang@arizona.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A new mineral species, bernardevansite (IMA2022-057), ideally Al2(Se4+O3)3⋅6H2O, has been discovered from the El Dragón mine, Potosí Department, Bolivia. It occurs as aggregates or spheres of radiating bladed crystals on a matrix consisting of Co-bearing krut'aite–penroseite. Associated minerals are Co-bearing krut'aite–penroseite, chalcomenite and ‘clinochalcomenite’. Bernardevansite is colourless in transmitted light, transparent with white streak and vitreous lustre. It is brittle and has a Mohs hardness of 2½–3. Cleavage is not observed. The measured and calculated densities are 2.93(5) and 2.997 g/cm3, respectively. Optically, bernardevansite is biaxial (+), with α = 1.642(5), β = 1.686(5) and γ = 1.74(1) (white light). An electron microprobe analysis yielded an empirical formula (based on 15 O apfu) (Al1.26Fe3+0.82)Σ2.08(Se0.98O3)3⋅6H2O, which can be simplified to (Al,Fe3+)2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O.

Bernardevansite is the Al-analogue of mandarinoite, Fe3+2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O or dimorphous with P$\bar{6}$2c alfredopetrovite. It is monoclinic, with space group P21/c and unit-cell parameters a = 16.5016(5), b = 7.7703(2), c = 9.8524(3) Å, β = 98.258(3)°, V = 1250.21(6) Å3 and Z = 4. The crystal structure of bernardevansite consists of a corner-sharing framework of M3+O6 (M = Al and Fe) octahedra and Se4+O3 trigonal pyramids, leaving large voids occupied by the H2O groups. There are two unique M3+ positions: M1 is octahedrally coordinated by (4O + 2H2O) and M2 by (5O + H2O). The structure refinement indicates that Al preferentially occupies M1 (= 0.692Al + 0.308Fe) over M2 (= 0.516Al + 0.484Fe). The substitution of the majority of Fe in mandarinoite by Al results in a significant reduction in its unit-cell volume from 1313.4 Å3 to 1250.21(6) Å3 for bernardevansite. The discovery of bernardevansite begs the question whether the Fe3+ end-member, Fe3+2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O, has two polymorphs as well, one with P21/c symmetry, as for mandarinoite and the other P$\bar{6}$2c, as for alfredopetrovite.

Type
Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © University of Arizona, 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland

Introduction

Bernardevansite, ideally Al2(Se4+O3)3⋅6H2O, is a new mineral species from the El Dragón mine, Antonio Quijarro Province, Potosí Department, Bolivia. It is named in honour of Dr Bernard W. Evans (b. 1934, Fig. 1), an Emeritus Professor in Mineralogy and Petrology at the University of Washington in Seattle, Washington, USA. Bernard received his B.Sc. from the University of London King's College, England, 1955 and Ph.D. from the University of Oxford, England in 1959. He was an Assistant and Associate Professor at the University of California in Berkeley from 1965–1969 and a Professor at the University of Washington in Seattle from 1969–2001. Bernard's major research interests included petrology, mineralogy, geochemistry and electron microprobe analysis, with outstanding contributions to the crystal chemistry and thermodynamics of amphiboles in particular and metamorphic minerals in general. In his over 50 years academic career, he has received numerous awards or honours, such as the Tennant Prize for Geology, King's College, London (1955), the Mineralogical Society of America (MSA) Award (1970), U.S. Senior Scientist Award, Humboldt Foundation (1988–89), the President of MSA (1993–94), Fulbright Scholar, France (1995–96) and the Roebling Medal of MSA (2008). Dr Evans has gladly accepted the proposed naming. The new mineral and its name (symbol Bev) have been approved by the Commission on New Minerals, Nomenclature and Classification (CNMNC) of the International Mineralogical Association (IMA2022-057, Yang et al., Reference Yang, Gu, Jenkins, Gibbs and Downs2023). The co-type samples have been deposited at the University of Arizona Alfie Norville Gem and Mineral Museum (Catalogue # 22712) and the RRUFF Project (deposition # R210010) (http://rruff.info). This paper describes the physical and chemical properties of bernardevansite, and its crystal structure determined from single-crystal X-ray diffraction data, illustrating its structural relationships with mandarinoite and alfredopetrovite.

Fig. 1. A portrait of Dr Bernard W. Evans in 2008.

Sample description and experimental methods

Occurrence

Bernardevansite was found on a specimen (Fig. 2) collected from the El Dragón mine (19°49’15”S, 65°55’00”W), Antonio Quijarro Province, Potosí Department, Bolivia. Associated minerals are Co-bearing krut'aite–penroseite (matrix), chalcomenite and ‘clinochalcomenite’ (not IMA-approved). Detailed descriptions on the geology and mineralogy of the El Dragón mine have been given by Grundmann et al. (Reference Grundmann, Lehrberger and Schnorrer-Köhler1990, Reference Grundmann, Lehrberger and Schnorrer-Köhler2007) and Grundmann and Förster (Reference Grundmann and Förster2017). This mine exploited a telethermal deposit consisting of a single selenide vein hosted in sandstones and shales. The major ore mineral is krut'aite, CuSe2, varying in composition to penroseite, NiSe2. Later solutions rich in Bi, Pb and Hg resulted in the crystallisation of minerals such as clausthalite, petrovicite, watkinsonite, and the recently described minerals eldragónite, Cu6BiSe4(Se2) (Paar et al., Reference Paar, Cooper, Moëlo, Stanley, Putz, Topa, Roberts, Stirling, Raith and Rowe2012), grundmannite, CuBiSe2 (Förster et al., Reference Förster, Bindi and Stanley2016), hansblockite, (Cu,Hg)(Bi,Pb)Se2 (Förster et al., Reference Förster, Bindi, Stanley and Grundmann2017), cerromojonite, CuPbBiSe3 (Förster et al., Reference Förster, Bindi, Grundmann and Stanley2018) and nickeltyrrellite, CuNi2Se4 (Förster et al., Reference Förster, Ma, Grundmann, Bindi and Stanley2019). Oxidation produced a wide range of secondary Se-bearing minerals, such as favreauite, PbBiCu6O4(SeO3)4(OH)⋅H2O (Mills et al., Reference Mills, Kampf, Housley, Christy, Thorne, Chen and Steele2014), alfredopetrovite, Al2(Se4+O3)3⋅6H2O (Kampf et al., Reference Kampf, Mills, Nash, Thorne and Favreau2016a), petermegawite Al6(Se4+O3)3[SiO3(OH)](OH)9⋅10H2O (Yang et al., Reference Yang, Gu, Jenkins, Gibbs, McGlasson and Scott2022a), franksousaite PbCu(Se6+O4)(OH)2 (Yang et al., Reference Yang, McGlasson, Gibbs and Downs2022b) and the new mineral bernardevansite, described herein.

Fig. 2. The specimen on which the new mineral bernardevansite, indicated by the blue arrow, was found (R210010).

Physical and chemical properties and Raman spectra

Bernardevansite occurs as aggregates or spheres of radiating bladed crystals (Figs 3,4,5) on a matrix consisting of Co-bearing krut'aite–penroseite. Individual crystals of bernardevansite are found up to 0.10 × 0.03 × 0.01 mm, with elongation along [001] and common crystal forms {100}, {110}, $\bar{1}$10} and {001}. Bernardevansite is colourless in transmitted light and transparent with white streak, and has a vitreous lustre. It is brittle and has a Mohs hardness of 2½–3. Cleavage was not observed. The density measured by flotation in heavy liquids is 2.93(5) g/cm3 and the calculated density is 2.997 g/cm3 on the basis of the empirical chemical formula and unit-cell volume from single-crystal X-ray diffraction data. Optically, bernardevansite is biaxial (+), with α = 1.642(5), β = 1.686(5), γ = 1.74(1) (determined in white light), 2V (meas.) = 84(2)° and 2V (calc.) = 87°. The pleochroism is very weak, from pale grey to grey, and dispersion was not observed. The calculated Gladstone-Dale compatibility index based on the empirical formula is 0.013 (superior) (Mandarino, Reference Mandarino1981). Bernardevansite is insoluble in water or hydrochloric acid.

Fig. 3. A microscopic view of aggregates or spheres of pale grey to colourless, radiating bladed bernardevansite crystals (R210010).

Fig. 4. A back-scattered electron image of aggregates of radiating bladed bernardevansite crystals (R210010).

Fig. 5. A back-scattered electron image of aggregates of bladed bernardevansite crystals (R210010).

The chemical composition was determined using a Shimadzu-1720 electron microprobe (WDS mode, 15 kV, 10 nA and a beam diameter of 2 μm). The standards used for the probe analysis are given in Table 1, along with the determined compositions (11 analysis points). The resultant chemical formula, calculated on the basis of 15 O apfu (from the structure determination), is (Al1.26Fe3+0.82)Σ2.08(Se0.98O3)3⋅6H2O, which can be simplified to (Al,Fe3+)2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O.

Table 1. Chemical compositions (in wt.%) of bernardevansite.*

*Bernardevansite is prone to the electron beam damage, however this did not seem to affect the relative proportions of cations. The large variations in the Al2O3 and Fe2O3 contents result from the strong correlation between the two components.

S.D. – standard deviation

The Raman spectrum of bernardevansite (Fig. 6) was collected on a randomly oriented crystal with a Thermo Almega microRaman system, using a solid-state laser with a wavelength of 532 nm at 75 mW power and a thermoelectric cooled CCD detector. The laser is partially polarised with 4 cm–1 resolution and a spot size of 1 μm.

Fig. 6. Raman spectra of bernardevansite, mandarinoite and alfredopetrovite.

X-ray crystallography

Both the powder and single-crystal X-ray diffraction data for bernardevansite were collected on a Rigaku Xtalab Synerg D/S 4-circle diffractometer equipped with CuKα radiation. Powder X-ray diffraction data were collected in the Gandolfi powder mode at 50 kV and 1 mA (Table 2) and the unit-cell parameters were refined using the program by Holland and Redfern (Reference Holland and Redfern1997): a = 16.535(1), b = 7.7762(5), c = 9.8841(6) Å, β = 98.337(7)° and V = 1257.5(5) Å3.

Table 2. Powder X-ray diffraction data (d in Å, I in %) for bernardevansite.*

*The strongest lines are given in bold

All bernardevansite crystals examined are pervasively twinned on (100) with a twin law ($\bar{1}$ 0 ½, 0 $\bar{1}$ 0, 0 0 1). Single-crystal X-ray diffraction data were collected from a 0.03 × 0.02 × 0.01 mm fragment. The systematic absences of reflections suggest the unique space group P21/c. The structure was solved and refined using SHELX2018 (Sheldrick, Reference Sheldrick2015a, Reference Sheldrick2015b). No H atoms were located through the difference-Fourier syntheses. The refined Al/Fe ratios at the octahedral M1 and M2 sites are (0.692Al + 0.308Fe) and (0.516Al + 0.484Fe), respectively, yielding a total Al/Fe ratio of 1.208/0.792, which is very close to that (1.211/0.789, normalised) measured from the electron microprobe analysis. The structure was refined as a 2-component twin with a twin ratio of 0.81/0.19. Final refinement statistics for bernardevansite are listed in Table 3. Atomic coordinates and displacement parameters are given in Tables 4 and 5, respectively. Selected bond distances are presented in Table 6. The bond-valence sums were calculated using the parameters given by Brese and O'Keeffe (Reference Brese and O'Keeffe1991) (Table 7). The crystallographic information file has been deposited with the Principal Editor of Mineralogical Magazine and is available as Supplementary material (see below).

Table 3. Summary of crystallographic data and refinement results for bernardevansite, mandarinoite and alfredopetrovite.

Table 4. Fractional atomic coordinates and equivalent isotropic displacement parameters (Å2) for bernardevansite.

Table 5. Atomic displacement parameters (Å2) for bernardevansite.

Table 6. Selected bond distances (Å) for bernardevansite, Al2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O and mandarinoite, Fe2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O.*

*Notes: M = Fe and (Al,Fe) for mandarinoite and bernardevansite, respectively.

References: (1) Hawthorne (Reference Hawthorne1984); (2) this study.

Table 7. Bond-valence sums for bernardevansite.*

*Note: The bond valence sums for M1 and M2 were calculated based on (0.692 Al + 0.308 Fe3+) and (0.516 Al + 0.484 Fe3+), respectively.

Crystal structure description and discussion

Bernardevansite, Al2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O, is isostructural with mandarinoite, Fe3+2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O (Hawthorne, Reference Hawthorne1984), rather than with the Al end-member P $\bar{6}$2c alfredopetrovite, Al2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O (Morris et al., Reference Morris, Harrison, Stucky and Cheetham1992; Kampf et al., Reference Kampf, Mills, Nash, Thorne and Favreau2016a). In other words, it is dimorphous with alfredopetrovite. The crystal structure of bernardevansite consists of a corner-sharing framework of M 3+O6 (M = Al and Fe) octahedra and Se4+O3 trigonal pyramids, leaving large voids that are occupied by the H2O groups (Fig. 7). There are three unique Se positions in bernardevansite, each of which is coordinated to three O atoms to form characteristic SeO3 trigonal pyramids. There are two unique M 3+ positions: M1 is octahedrally coordinated by (4O + 2H2O) and M2 by (5O + H2O). The structure refinement indicates that Al preferentially occupies M1 (= 0.692Al + 0.308Fe) over M2 (= 0.516Al + 0.484Fe). There are three distinct H2O molecules (O13, O14 and O15) in the structure that are not bonded to any non-H cation (Table 7), in addition to three H2O molecules (O10, O11 and O12) bonded to M cations. Although our structure determination failed to locate H atoms, all O–O distances for H-bonding in bernardevansite are consistent and comparable with those found in mandarinoite (Hawthorne, Reference Hawthorne1984) (Table 6).

Fig. 7. Crystal structure of bernardevansite. Green, yellow and grey polyhedra represent M1O6, M2O6 and SeO3 groups, respectively. Purple and aqua spheres represent Se (Se1, Se2 and Se3) atoms and H2O (O13, O14 and O15) groups that are not bonded to any non-H cation, respectively.

The substitution of the majority of Fe in mandarinoite by Al in bernardevansite results in a significant reduction in unit-cell volume from 1313.4 Å3 to 1250.21(6) Å3, which motivated this investigation. Compared to mandarinoite, which has the identical average <M–O> bond distances (2.021 Å) for the two octahedral sites (Hawthorne, Reference Hawthorne1984), the <M–O> distance for the M1 site (1.942 Å) in bernardevansite is shorter than that for the M2 site (1.955 Å), consistent with the preference of Al at M1 over M2 (0.692 vs. 0.516), as the ionic radius of VIAl3+ (0.535 Å) is smaller than that of VIFe3+ (0.645 Å) (Shannon, Reference Shannon1976). A survey of the literature appears to suggest that, for a structure with two or more octahedral sites, Al3+ is likely to be favoured by the site coordinated with more H2O molecules. This is indeed the case for bernardevansite, as the M1 site is coordinated by (4O + 2H2O) and M2 by (5O + H2O). Another typical example is coquimbite, which contains three distinct octahedral sites (M1, M2 and M3), with M1 coordinated by (6H2O), M2 by (6O2–) and M3 by (3H2O + 3O2–). All structure determinations on coquimbite have shown that Al3+ is predominately or exclusively ordered into the M1 site (e.g. Demartin et al., Reference Demartin, Castellano, Gramaccioli and Campostrini2010; Yang and Giester, Reference Yang and Giester2018; Mauro et al., Reference Mauro, Biagioni, Pasero, Skogby and Zaccarini2020 and references therein).

According to the Raman spectroscopic studies on hydrous materials containing (SeO3)2– (e.g. Wickleder et al., Reference Wickleder, Buchner, Wickleder, Sheik, Brunklaus and Eckert2004; Frost et al., Reference Frost, Weier, Reddy and Čejka2006; Frost and Keeffe, Reference Frost and Keeffe2008; Djemel et al., Reference Djemel, Abdelhedi, Ktari and Dammak2013; Wolak et al., Reference Wolak, Pawlowski, Polomska and Pietraszko2013; Kasatkin et al., Reference Kasatkin, Plášil, Marty, Agakhanov, Belakovskiy and Lykova2014; Mills et al., Reference Mills, Kampf, Housley, Christy, Thorne, Chen and Steele2014; Kampf et al., Reference Kampf, Mills and Nash2016b), we made the following tentative assignments of major Raman bands for bernardevansite. The broad bands between 2900 and 3500 cm–1 and those between 1500 and 1750 cm–1 are due to the O–H stretching and H–O–H bending modes in H2O groups, respectively. The bands at 844 and 685 cm–1 are ascribable to the Se4+–O symmetric and antisymmetric stretching vibrations, respectively, within the Se4+O3 groups, whereas those from 320 to 570 cm–1 originate from the O–Se4+–O bending modes. The bands below 320 cm–1 are mainly associated with the rotational and translational modes of Se4+O3 groups, as well as the M 3+–O interactions and lattice vibrational modes.

For comparison, the Raman spectra of alfredopetrovite, Al2(Se4+O3)3⋅6H2O and mandarinoite, Fe3+2(Se4+O3)3⋅6H2O, from the RRUFF Project (http://rruff.info/R210014 and http://rruff.info/R140742, respectively) are also plotted in Fig. 6. Evidently, the spectrum of bernardevansite is more similar to that of mandarinoite than to that of alfredopetrovite, pointing to the structural similarities between bernardevansite and mandarinoite.

Although the bernardevansite sample we studied here, (Al0.61Fe3+0.39)2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O, is isostructural with mandarinoite, its chemistry is closer to that of alfredopetrovite, the Al end-member of the Fe3+2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O–Al2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O system, as illustrated in Fig. 8. This raises an interesting question about its ideal chemical formula. Should it be expressed as (1) an Fe-bearing formula, (Al1–xFex)2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O, where 0 < x < 0.5, or (2) an Fe-free end-member formula, Al2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O. The first Fe-bearing formula requires that Fe is essential to stabilise the P21/c mandarinoite-type structure and there is no complete solid-solution series between Al2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O and Fe2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O. This formula appears to be consistent with synthetic experiments, as several hydrothermal syntheses of Al selenites conducted thus far have revealed only the hexagonal form of Al2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O and no monoclinic form (Morris et al., Reference Morris, Harrison, Stucky and Cheetham1992; Ratheesh et al., Reference Ratheesh, Suresh, Nayar and Morris1997 and references therein). In contrast, the second Fe-free formula implies that Al2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O possesses two polymorphs: a monoclinic P21/c mandarinoite-type form and a hexagonal P $\bar{6}$2c alfredopetrovite form. Regardless of its ideal chemical formula, the discovery of bernardevansite begs the question whether the Fe3+ end-member, Fe3+2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O, has two polymorphs as well, one with P21/c symmetry, as for mandarinoite, and the other P $\bar{6}$2c, as for alfredopetrovite.

Fig. 8. A concept of classification of M 3+(SeO3)3⋅6H2O minerals (M = Al and Fe).

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for the constructive comments by Drs Anthony Kampf and Peter Leverett. This study was funded by the Feinglos family and Mr. Michael M. Scott.

Supplementary material

To view supplementary material for this article, please visit https://doi.org/10.1180/mgm.2023.7

Competing interests

The authors declare none.

Footnotes

Associate Editor: Daniel Atencio

References

Brese, N.E. and O'Keeffe, M. (1991) Bond-valence parameters for solids. Acta Crystallographica, B47, 192197.Google Scholar
Demartin, F., Castellano, C., Gramaccioli, C.M. and Campostrini, I. (2010) Aluminum-for-iron substitution, hydrogen bonding, and a novel structure-type in coquimbite-like minerals. The Canadian Mineralogist, 48, 323333.Google Scholar
Djemel, M., Abdelhedi, M., Ktari, L. and Dammak, M. (2013) X-ray diffraction, Raman study and electrical properties of the new mixed compound Rb1.7K0.3(SO4)0.88(SeO4)0.12Te(OH)6. Journal of Molecular Structure, 1047, 1521.Google Scholar
Förster, H.-J., Bindi, L. and Stanley, C.J. (2016) Grundmannite, CuBiSe2, the Se-analogue of emplectite, a new mineral from the El Dragón mine, Potosí, Bolivia. European Journal of Mineralogy, 28, 467477.Google Scholar
Förster, H.-J., Bindi, L., Stanley, C.J. and Grundmann, G. (2017) Hansblockite, (Cu,Hg)(Bi,Pb)Se2, the monoclinic polymorph of grundmannite: a new mineral from the Se mineralization at El Dragón (Bolivia). Mineralogical Magazine, 81, 229240.Google Scholar
Förster, H.-J., Bindi, L., Grundmann, G. and Stanley, C.J. (2018) Cerromojonite, CuPbBiSe3, from El Dragón (Bolivia): A new member of the bournonite group. Minerals, 8, 420.Google Scholar
Förster, H.-J., Ma, C., Grundmann, G., Bindi, L. and Stanley, C.J. (2019) Nickeltyrrellite, CuNi2Se4, a new member of the spinel supergroup from El Dragón, Bolivia. The Canadian Mineralogist, 57, 637646.Google Scholar
Frost, R.L. and Keeffe, E.C. (2008) Raman spectroscopic study of the schmiederite Pb2Cu2[(OH)4|SeO3|SeO4]. Journal of Raman Spectroscopy, 39, 1408–1402.Google Scholar
Frost, R.L., Weier, M.L., Reddy, B.J. and Čejka, J. (2006) A Raman spectroscopic study of the uranyl selenite mineral haynesite, Journal of Raman Spectroscopy, 37, 816821.Google Scholar
Grundmann, G. and Förster, H.-J. (2017) Origin of the El Dragón Selenium Mineralization, Quijarro Province, Potosí, Bolivia. Minerals, 7, 168.Google Scholar
Grundmann, G., Lehrberger, G. and Schnorrer-Köhler, G. (1990) The El Dragón mine, Potosí, Bolivia. Mineralogical Record, 21, 133150.Google Scholar
Grundmann, G., Lehrberger, G. and Schnorrer-Köhler, G. (2007) The “El Dragón Mine”, Porco, Potosí, Bolivia - Selenium minerals. Mineral UP, 1, 1625.Google Scholar
Hawthorne, F.C. (1984) The crystal structure of mandarinoite, Fe3+2Se3O9⋅6H2O. The Canadian Mineralogist, 22, 475480.Google Scholar
Holland, T.J.B. and Redfern, S.A.T. (1997) Unit cell refinement from powder diffraction data: the use of regression diagnostics. Mineralogical Magazine, 61, 6577.Google Scholar
Kampf, A.R., Mills, S.J., Nash, B.P., Thorne, B. and Favreau, G. (2016a) Alfredopetrovite, a new selenite mineral from the El Dragón mine, Bolivia. European Journal of Mineralogy, 28, 479484.Google Scholar
Kampf, A.R., Mills, S.J. and Nash, B.P. (2016b) Pauladamsite, Cu4(SeO3)(SO4)(OH)4⋅2H2O, a new mineral from the Santa Rosa mine, Darwin district, California, USA. Mineralogical Magazine, 80, 949958.Google Scholar
Kasatkin, A.V., Plášil, J., Marty, J., Agakhanov, A.A., Belakovskiy, D.I. and Lykova, I.S. (2014) Nestolaite, CaSeO3⋅H2O, a new mineral from the Little Eva mine, Grand County, Utah, USA. Mineralogical Magazine, 78, 497505.Google Scholar
Mandarino, J.A. (1981) The Gladstone–Dale relationship. IV. The compatibility concept and its application. The Canadian Mineralogist, 19, 441450.Google Scholar
Mauro, D., Biagioni, C., Pasero, M., Skogby, H. and Zaccarini, F. (2020) Redefinition of coquimbite, AlFe3+3(SO4)6(H2O)12⋅6H2O. Mineralogical Magazine, 84, 275282.Google Scholar
Mills, S.J., Kampf, A.R., Housley, R.M., Christy, A.G., Thorne, B., Chen, Y.-S. and Steele, I.M. (2014) Favreauite, a new selenite mineral from the El Dragón mine, Bolivia. European Journal of Mineralogy, 26, 771781.Google Scholar
Morris, R.E., Harrison, W.T.A., Stucky, G.D. and Cheetham, A.K. (1992) On the structure of Al2(SeO3)3.6H2O. Journal of Solid State Chemistry, 99, 200.Google Scholar
Paar, W.H., Cooper, M.A., Moëlo, Y., Stanley, C.J., Putz, H., Topa, D., Roberts, A.C., Stirling, J., Raith, J.G. and Rowe, R. (2012) Eldragónite, Cu6BiSe4(Se2), A new mineral species from the El Dragón Mine, Potosí, Bolivia, and its crystal structure. The Canadian Mineralogist, 50, 281294.Google Scholar
Ratheesh, R., Suresh, G., Nayar, V.U. and Morris, R.E. (1997) Vibrational spectra of three aluminum selenities Al2(SeO3)3⋅3H2O, Al2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O and AlH(SeO3)2⋅H2O. Spectrochimica Acta Part A: Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy, 53, 19751979.Google Scholar
Shannon, R.D. (1976) Revised effective ionic radii and systematic studies of interatomic distances in halides and chalcogenides. Acta Crystallographica, A32, 751767.Google Scholar
Sheldrick, G.M. (2015a) SHELXT – Integrated space-group and crystal structure determination. Acta Crystallographica, A71, 38.Google Scholar
Sheldrick, G.M. (2015b) Crystal structure refinement with SHELX. Acta Crystallographica, C71, 38.Google Scholar
Wickleder, M.S., Buchner, O., Wickleder, C., Sheik, S.E., Brunklaus, G. and Eckert, H. (2004) Au2(SeO3)2(SeO4): Synthesis and characterization of a new noncentrosymmetric selenite-selenate. Inorganic Chemistry, 43, 58605864.Google Scholar
Wolak, J., Pawlowski, A., Polomska, M. and Pietraszko, A. (2013) Molecular dynamics in (NH4)3H(SeO4)2 at superionic phase transitions: Raman spectroscopy study. Phase Transitions, 86, 182190.Google Scholar
Yang, Z. and Giester, G. (2018) Structure refinements of coquimbite and paracoquimbite from the Hongshan Cu-Au deposit, NW China. European Journal of Mineralogy, 30, 849858.Google Scholar
Yang, H., Gu, X., Jenkins, R.A., Gibbs, R.B., McGlasson, J.A. and Scott, M.M. (2022a) Petermegawite, IMA2021-079. CNMNC Newsletter 64. Mineralogical Magazine, 86, 178182, https://doi.org/10.1180/mgm.2021.93.Google Scholar
Yang, H., McGlasson, J.A., Gibbs, R.B. and Downs, R.T. (2022b) Franksousaite, PbCu(Se6+O4)(OH)2, the Se6+ analogue of linarite, a new mineral from the El Dragón mine, Potosí, Bolivia. Mineralogical Magazine, 86, 792798.Google Scholar
Yang, H., Gu, X., Jenkins, R.A., Gibbs, R.G. and Downs, R.T. (2023) Bernardevansite, IMA 2022-057. CNMNC Newsletter 70, Mineralogical Magazine, 87, 160168, https://doi.org/10.1180/mgm.2022.135Google Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. A portrait of Dr Bernard W. Evans in 2008.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. The specimen on which the new mineral bernardevansite, indicated by the blue arrow, was found (R210010).

Figure 2

Fig. 3. A microscopic view of aggregates or spheres of pale grey to colourless, radiating bladed bernardevansite crystals (R210010).

Figure 3

Fig. 4. A back-scattered electron image of aggregates of radiating bladed bernardevansite crystals (R210010).

Figure 4

Fig. 5. A back-scattered electron image of aggregates of bladed bernardevansite crystals (R210010).

Figure 5

Table 1. Chemical compositions (in wt.%) of bernardevansite.*

Figure 6

Fig. 6. Raman spectra of bernardevansite, mandarinoite and alfredopetrovite.

Figure 7

Table 2. Powder X-ray diffraction data (d in Å, I in %) for bernardevansite.*

Figure 8

Table 3. Summary of crystallographic data and refinement results for bernardevansite, mandarinoite and alfredopetrovite.

Figure 9

Table 4. Fractional atomic coordinates and equivalent isotropic displacement parameters (Å2) for bernardevansite.

Figure 10

Table 5. Atomic displacement parameters (Å2) for bernardevansite.

Figure 11

Table 6. Selected bond distances (Å) for bernardevansite, Al2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O and mandarinoite, Fe2(SeO3)3⋅6H2O.*

Figure 12

Table 7. Bond-valence sums for bernardevansite.*

Figure 13

Fig. 7. Crystal structure of bernardevansite. Green, yellow and grey polyhedra represent M1O6, M2O6 and SeO3 groups, respectively. Purple and aqua spheres represent Se (Se1, Se2 and Se3) atoms and H2O (O13, O14 and O15) groups that are not bonded to any non-H cation, respectively.

Figure 14

Fig. 8. A concept of classification of M3+(SeO3)3⋅6H2O minerals (M = Al and Fe).

Supplementary material: File

Yang et al. supplementary material

Yang et al. supplementary material

Download Yang et al. supplementary material(File)
File 66.4 KB