Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T21:54:54.442Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the mesosiderite-grahamite group of Meteorites : with analyses of Vaca Muerta, Hainholz, Simondium, and Powder Mill Creek1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2018

G. T. Prior
G. T. Prior*
Affiliation:
Mineral Department of the British Museum
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the Rose-Tschermak-Brezina classification of meteorites the intermediate class of stony-irons, in which iron and stony matter occur in approximately equal amounts and to which Maskelyne gave the name siderolites, is divided into (1) siderolites proper, including the groups of the pallasites and the siderophyres, and (2) lithosiderites, comprising the groups of tile mesosiderites, glahamites, and ]odranites. Mesosiderites are defined as consisting of iron and crystalline olivine and bronzite, and grahamites of the same constituents with the addition of plagioclasefelspar.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical magazine and journal of the Mineralogical Society , Volume 18 , Issue 85 , August 1918 , pp. 151 - 172
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1918

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

1

Communicated by permission of the Trustees of the British Museum.

References

page 152 note 1 G. Rose, Monatsber. Akad. Berlin, 1863, p. 34.

page 152 note 2 Prior, G. T., On the genetic relationship and classification of meteorites. Mineralogical Magazine, 1916, vol. xviii, p. 85Google Scholar.

page 152 note 3 Domeyko, I., Anal. Univers. d. Chili (Santiago), 1864, vol. xxv, p. 289Google Scholar.

page 152 note 4 Domeyko, I., Compt. Rend. Acad. Sei. Paris, 1875, vol. lxxxi, p. 599Google Scholar.

page 152 note 5 L. Fletcher, On the Meteorites which have been found in the Desert of Atacarna and its neighbourhood. Mineralogical Magazine, 1889, voL viii, p. 284.

page 153 note 1 Howell, E. E., Proc. Rochester Acad. Sci., 1890, vol. i, p. 98Google Scholar.

page 154 note * These amounts are taken to correspond to the formula Fe2NiP for sehreibersite, but in the analysis of the unattracted, part of the phosphorus is probably in the form of phosphate, and thus the total amount of sehreibersite may be over-estimated.

page 154 note † From tlle analysis of the total unattraeted portion.

page 155 note * From the analyais of the total unattracted portion.

page 155 note † Including some MnO.

page 155 note 1 Tachermak, G., Sitzungsber. Akad. Wiss. Wien, 1884, vol. lxxxviii, (1), p. 852Google Scholar.

page 156 note 1 Domeyko, I., Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. Paris, 1864, vol. lviii, p. 551Google Scholar.

page 156 note 2 Joy, C. A., Amer. Journ. Sci., 1864, ser. 2, vol. xxxvii, p. 243Google Scholar.

page 156 note 3 Howell, E. E., Proc. Rochester Acad. Sci, 1890, vol. i, p. 93Google Scholar.

page 156 note 4 Ibid., p. 94.

page 158 note 1 Wöhler, F., Ann. Phys. Chem. (Poggendorff), 1857, vol. c, p. 342Google Scholar.

page 158 note 2 C. Rammelsberg, Monatsber. Berlin. Akad. 1870, p. 322.

page 158 note 3 E. Priwoznik, Österr. Zeits. Berg- u. Hüttenwesen, 1892, No. 39.

page 158 note 4 In the calculation of the bulk-analysis, analysis (1) of the attracted, with the loss evenly distributed over the constituents, was used.

page 158 note * Calculated from result in (2).

page 158 note † The amounts of Fe and Ni are taken to correspond to the formula Fe2NiP for schrcibersite.

page 159 note * The Ni and P are taken as oxidized, since in the analysis of the soluble below there is no excess of Fe beyond that determined as Fe2O3 to form schreibersite.

page 160 note * These determinations were made on separate portions of the total unattracted.

page 161 note 1 See G. Tschermak, 'Die mikrcakopischo Beschaffenheit der Meteoriten,' 1888-1885, p, 22 and pl. XXIV, fig. 4.

page 161 note 2 Prior, G. T., Mineralogical Magazine, 1910, vol. xv, p. 312Google Scholar.

page 163 note * These determinations were made on separate portions of the total unattracted material. A large amount of the H2O is to be referred to the part of the unattracted soluble in water.

page 164 note 1 Smith, J. L., Amer. Journ. Sci, 1865, ser. 2, vol. xl, p. 218Google Scholar.

page 165 note 1 Whitiield, J. E., Amer. Journ. Sci., 1887, ser. 3, vol. xxxiv, p. 467Google Scholar.

page 166 note 1 There is no justification for G. P. Merrill's suggestion (see Handbook and Descriptive Catalogue of the Meteorite Collections in the United States National Museum. U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 94, 1916, p. 106) that in Kunz's original deecription the analyses of the soluble and insoluble were reversed.

page 166 note 2 Smith, J. L., Amer. Journ. Sci., 1880, ser. 8, vol. xix, p. 459Google Scholar.

page 166 note 3 Shepard, C. U., Amer. Journ. Sci., 1879, ser. 8, vol. xviii, p. 188Google Scholar.

page 166 note 4 G. Tschermak, 'Die mikroskopische Besvhaffenheit der Meteoriten,' 1883-1885, pp. 22 and 23, pl. XXIV. fig. 1.

page 166 note 5 M. E. Wadsworth, 'Lithological Studies,' 1884, pp. 92-101.

page 166 note 6 S. Meunier, 'Révision des Lithosidérites,' 1895, pp. 30-32.

page 167 note 1 Whitfleld, A. E., Amer. Journ. Sci., 1887, ser. 8, vol. xxxiv, p. 387Google Scholar.

page 167 note 2 G. F. Kunz, ibid., p. 476.

page 169 note 1 Eakins, L. G., Amer. Journ. Sci., 1898, ser. 3, vol. xlvi, p. 288Google Scholar.

page 169 note 2 Merrill, G. P., Amer. Journ .Sci., 1896, ser. 4, vol. v, p. 149Google Scholar.

page 170 note 1 Prior, G. T., Mineralogical Magazine, 1916, vol. xviii, pp. 34-115Google Scholar.