DOCSLIB.ORG

Geology and Ore Deposits of the Manhattan District Nevada

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Geology and Ore Deposits of the Manhattan District Nevada DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR HUBERT WORK, Secretary UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, Director Bulletin 723 GEOLOGY AND ORE DEPOSITS OF THE MANHATTAN DISTRICT NEVADA BY HENRY G. FERGUSON WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1924 ADDITIONAL COPFES OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE PROCURED FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON, D. C. AT 50 CENTS PER COPY CONTENTS. J/age. Outline of the report______________________________ vn Introduction_.___________________________________ 1 Field work and acknowledgments- ______________ 1 Location and topography___________^_____________ 2 Climate and vegetation___________________________ 4 History and production___________________________ 5 Bibliography_______________________________'_;_ 10 General geology___________________________________ 14 Summary _ _________________________ 14 Paleozoic rocks_______________________________ 17 Cambrian (?) rocks___________r_________________________ 18 Gold Hill formation______________1_____________ 18 Ordovician (?) rocks__________________________ 20 Mayflower schist________________________ 20 Zanzibar limestone_________________________ 21 Ordovician rocks________________'.__________________ 22 Toquima formation__________________________ 22 Permian (?) sandstone_________________________ 25 Relation to other Paleozoic sections of southwestern Nevada__ 26 Granitic rocks (Cretaceous?)__ __________________ 38 Tertiary rocks____________ _____1________ 42 Summary_____________ _______________ 42 Esmeralda formation____ _____!_______________ 43 Hedwig breccia member_____________________ 43 Round Rock member___ _______________ 44 Diamond King member______________________ 46 Bald Mountain lake beds member_______________ 48 Quartz latite member_____ ________________ 50 Maris rhyolite__ ___ 50 Andesite porphyry_____________________________ 51 Hornblende and biotite andesite porphyry____________ . 52 Dacite__________________ _______________ 53 Age and correlation of the Tertiary rocks______________. 53 Structure___________________________________ 55 Development of the present topography ________________ 61 Economic geology _ 76 Lode deposits _______ _ __ 76 Deposits of deep-seated origin____________________ 77 Deposits of the shallow vein type _________________ 78 Deposits in the Tertiary rocks_________________. 78 Deposits in the older rocks____________________ 79 Deposits in limestone ___________ ___ 82 Phosphate mineralization_____________________ 94 Mineralogy_______:________________________ 96 Deposits of deep-seated origin_____ ___________ 96 , m IV CONTENTS. Economic geology Continued. Lode deposits Continued. Mineralogy Continued. Page. Shallow vein deposits_______________________ 97 Deposits in limestone;.__ ___________________ 97 Distribution_______________________'.______ 97 Paragenesis__________________________ 98 Arsenical minerals______________________ 99 Gold of the arsenical ores____________'._________. 105 1 Stibnite_____________________________, 106 Sericite and leverrierite___________-_______ 107 Barite______________________________ 108 Oxidation and enrichment_______________________ 108 Relation of ore deposition to faulting____ __'._______ 112 Age of ore deposition _ ________ _ __ 114 Deep-seated deposits________________________ 114 Veins in the Tertiary rocks________ _____ __ 114 Ores in the Gold Hill formation_________________ 114 Limestone ores __ *________________________ 115 Placer deposits______________________.________ 117 General features____________________________ 117 Older gravel_______________________________ 120 Gulch gravel _______________________________ 121 The bedrock____________________________ 121 The gravel____________________________ 123 ; Gold content ____________________________ 124 Character of the gold___ _____ _________ 125 Other minerals__________________________ 132 Recent wash ____'_________________________ 133 Future of the district____________________________ 133 Mines and prospects ___ _____ _____ __ _________ 135 Deep-seated deposits___ __ ____________ __ __ 136 Nemo mine_____ ____________~~___________ 136 Shallow vein deposits in the^Tertiary rocks _ 136 Bald Mountain prospect____________________,.____ 136 Buckeye prospect 137 Wall mine _______________________________ 137 Maris mine_ __ _ _ __ __ ___ 138 Shallow vein deposits in the older rocks________________ 139 Big Pine mine________________________________ 139 Big Four mine___________ __________________ 140 ; Mayflower mine _____________________________ 141 Riley Fraction mine______________-___________ 142 Jumping Jack mine.-__________________________ 143 Golden Crater mine___________________________ 143 Union No. 9 mine_________ __________________ 143 Stray Dog mine __________________ _________ 144 Little Grey mine_____________________________ 14o : Thanksgiving mine _..__________________________ 146 ; Deposits in limestone.___________________________. 147 White Caps Extension mine______________________ ,147 Zanzibar mine______________________________ 147 | White Caps mine_ __________________________.. 147 1 Morning Glory mine______..___________________ 151 CONTENTS. V Mines and prospects Continued. Deposits in limestone Continued. Page. Manhattan Consolidated mine __ ______--___ _____ 151 Union Amalgamated mine________'.______________ 153 Union No. 4 mine____________________________ 154 April Fool mine-____ ___'.______ ____________ 154 Red Top prospect ______________ _ ____ 156 Toro Blanco mine____________________ ______ 156 Mustang mine___________________'_________ 157 Broncho mine ______________________________ 158 Sunset prospect_____________________'.____________ 158 Oso mine ________________________.________ 159 Black Mammoth prospect__.____________________ 159 Thelma mine______________________________ 160 Index___ _______________________________1_ 161 ILLUSTRATIONS. Page. PLATE I. Geologic map and structure sections of the Manhattan district, Nev __.._______________:____<.___.___ In pocket. II. Geologic map and structure sections of the productive-portion of the Manhattan district, Nev_________________ 22 III. A, Round Rock, a typical erosion form of the Round Rock breccia; B, Hedwig breccia resting on contorted slate of the Toquima formation north of Mustang Hill _________ 54 IV. Hills of volcanic rocks north of Belmont road_________ 54 V. A, Folds in Zanzibar limestone near Tonopah road; B, Old stope of Little Grey mine_____________-______ 54 VI. A, Central part of Toquima Range; B, Front of Toyabe Range; C, Front of Toquima Range___:____._____ __ _ 55 VII. Flood of August, 1914, at Manhattan_______________ 70 VIII. Map of Nevada showing Pleistocene lake beds_ _ 70 IX. A, Big Pine glory hole; B, Typical ore of the schist mines____ 86 X. Geologic map of th'e 310, 565, and 800 foot levels, White Caps mine ___________________________________ 86 XI. A, Limestone partly replaced by coarsely crystalline white cal- cite, 310'-foot level, White Caps mine; B, Coarse calcite partly replaced by quartz with disseminated pyrite and arsenopyrite and a little carbonaceous matter __ 86 XII. Ore from dump of Manhattan Consolidated mine-,. 87 XIII. A, South end of April Fool Hill; B, Typical quartzose ore with small remnants of unreplaced calcite from upper workings of April Fool mine___________ 102 XIV. A, Interbanding of quartz and chalcedony with sericite in lower tunnel of April Fool mine; B, " Pipe workings " on upper part of Mustang claim_ _ _ 102 XV. A, Coarse calcite replaced by realgar, White Caps mine; B, Fault breccia impregnated by realgar, 665-foot level, White Caps mine -_______-__ 102 VI CONTENTS. Page PLATE XVI. A, Arsenical ore showing alteration of realgar to orpiroent, 310-foot level, White Caps mine; B, Stibnite in gangue of barite and quartz, Sunset prospect_______________ 103 . XVII. A, Manhattan Gulch between Mount Moriah and Wolfe Tone Point, showing placer workings; B, Placer mine in western . part of Manhattan Gulch, showing sluice boxes and pond 118 XVIII. Map of the productive portion of Manhattan Gulch_____ 124 FIGURE 1. Map of part of central Nevada showing, the location of the Manhattan district_____________________________ 2 . 2. Reconnaissance geologic map of the southern part of the Toquima 'Range__________________________ 16 3. Interbedded quartzite and graptolite slate, Palo Alto Hill__ 24 4. Sketch map and sections of parts of Arlington No. 3 and Amboy claims, showing benches and deep channel_^___ 67 5. Diagrammatic cross sections of Manhattan Gulch, showing stages of erosion and filling___________________ 74 6. Geologic rnap of the area between the White Caps and Man­ hattan Consolidated mines____________________ 83 7. Sketch plan showing ore shoots in limestone in upper levels of White Caps mine_______________________ 84 8. Composite plan showing limestone blocks in White Caps mine .__-__________________:___________ 85 9. Section through White Caps shaft, looking north_______ 86 10. Section in White Caps mine___________________ 87 11. Calcite replacing limestone, 440-foot level, White Caps mine_ SS 12. Sketch map of the 300-foot and 400-foot levels, Manhattan Consolidated mine________________________ 91 13. Curve showing tonnage of ore milled in the Manhattan dis­ trict, 1906-1921, and average value of bullion obtained per ton of ore milled__________________________ 109 14. Curve showing placer production in the Manhattan district, 1907-1921 ______________ _______________ 119 15. Curve showing variation in fineness of placer gold in the Manhattan district__________________________
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. PEBBLE PROJECT
    Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. DEVELOPING A GOLD-COPPER-MOLYBDENUM GIANT PEBBLEPEBBLE DEPOSIT DEPOSIT PEBBLE PROJECT ALASKA, USA HUNTER DICKINSON INC. Responsible Mineral Development January 2005 CAUTIONARY AND FORWARD LOOKING INFORMATION COMMENTS All information contained in this graphic presentation booklet relating to the contents of the November 2004 Preliminary Assessment of the Pebble Gold-Copper-Molybdenum Project, including but not limited to representations of the Pebble project's potential and information about production parameters, capital costs, sustaining capital costs, and operating costs, production summary, off-site costs, and financial analyses, are "forward looking statements" within the definition of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The information relating to the possible construction of a port, road, power generating facilities and power transmission facilities also constitutes such "forward looking statements." The Preliminary Assessment was prepared to broadly quantify the Pebble project's capital and operating cost parameters and to provide guidance on the type and scale of future project engineering and development work that will be needed to ultimately define the project's likelihood of feasibility and optimal production rate. It was not prepared to be used as a valuation of the Pebble project nor should it be considered to be a pre- feasibility study. The capital and operating cost estimates which were used have been developed only to an approximate order of magnitude based on generally understood capital cost to production level relationships and they are not based on any systematic engineering studies, so the ultimate costs may vary widely from the amounts set out in the Preliminary Assessment.
    [Show full text]
  • Hunter Dickinson Inc
    Behind the Pebble Mine: Hunter Dickinson Inc. The Canadian Mining Company You’ve Never Heard Of Joan Kuyek February 2018 This report is published by MiningWatch Canada Information in this report is considered up to date as of February 2, 2018 About the author: Dr. Joan Kuyek has a long history as a researcher, adult educator, and community organizer. From 1999- 2009, she was the founding National Coordinator of MiningWatch Canada. Since that time, she has con- tinued to work as a consultant for communities facing mining issues and as a sessional instructor at Car- leton, Queen’s and Algoma Universities. Executive Summary Investors are strongly advised to fact-check the information published by Northern Dynasty Minerals (TSX: NDM; NYSE: NAK) about Hunter Dickinson Incorporated and its affiliated companies. Hunter Dickinson Incorporated (HDI) is the company behind Northern Dynasty and the proposed Pebble Mine in Alaska. Northern Dynasty represents a level of risky speculative investment unprecedented even amongst other junior mining companies. Investors should take the cautionary statement at the beginning of any and all Northern Dynasty presentations very seriously indeed.1 Serious discrepancies exist between the information buried in company corporate filings with securities regulators and the information provided by Northern Dynasty and HDI to the public. The costs external- ized to lenders, communities and regulators can exceed the economic benefits of the mining project. The long-term outcomes of HDI projects have not, in general, been good news for the companies that came after them. Given the determined opposition in Alaska to the Pebble Mine over almost two decades, MiningWatch Canada decided to analyze the risks to potential long term investors in Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Mine, based on a review of 19 past and current projects promoted by the Hunter Dickinson Group of companies.
    [Show full text]
  • Theoretical Studies on As and Sb Sulfide Molecules
    Mineral Spectroscopy: A Tribute to Roger G. Bums © The Geochemical Society, Special Publication No.5, 1996 Editors: M. D. Dyar, C. McCammon and M. W. Schaefer Theoretical studies on As and Sb sulfide molecules J. A. TOSSELL Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, U.S.A. Abstract-Dimorphite (As4S3) and realgar and pararealgar (As4S4) occur as crystalline solids con- taining As4S3 and As4S4 molecules, respectively. Crystalline As2S3 (orpiment) has a layered structure composed of rings of AsS3 triangles, rather than one composed of discrete As4S6 molecules. When orpiment dissolves in concentrated sulfidic solutions the species produced, as characterized by IR and EXAFS, are mononuclear, e.g. ASS3H21, but solubility studies suggest trimeric species in some concentration regimes. Of the antimony sulfides only Sb2S3 (stibnite) has been characterized and its crystal structure does not contain Sb4S6 molecular units. We have used molecular quantum mechanical techniques to calculate the structures, stabilities, vibrational spectra and other properties of As S , 4 3 As4S4, As4S6, As4SIO, Sb4S3, Sb4S4, Sb4S6 and Sb4SlO (as well as S8 and P4S3, for comparison with previous calculations). The calculated structures and vibrational spectra are in good agreement with experiment (after scaling the vibrational frequencies by the standard correction factor of 0.893 for polarized split valence Hartree-Fock self-consistent-field calculations). The calculated geometry of the As4S. isomer recently characterized in pararealgar crystals also agrees well with experiment and is calculated to be about 2.9 kcal/mole less stable than the As4S4 isomer found in realgar. The calculated heats of formation of the arsenic sulfide gas-phase molecules, compared to the elemental cluster molecules As., Sb, and S8, are smaller than the experimental heats of formation for the solid arsenic sulfides, but shown the same trend with oxidation state.
    [Show full text]
  • COMPARISON of the PEBBLE MINE with OTHER ALASKA LARGE HARD ROCK MINES
    COMPARISON of the PEBBLE MINE with OTHER ALASKA LARGE HARD ROCK MINES Stuart Levit and David Chambers Center for Science in Public Participation February, 2012 Summary If permitted, the Pebble mine will be North America’s, and one of the world’s largest mines. It has been suggested that in spite of its size the Pebble mine is comparable to other Alaska mining projects. The amount of ore mined and the area that would be disturbed by development at the Pebble mine is on a scale entirely of its own in Alaska, and even enormous on a global scale. Size alone does not determine impacts, but based on other factors such as acid producing potential, easy movement of water away from the mine, a world class fishery, wet climate regime, etc., the mine’s potential impacts could be significant and irreparable. Several of Alaska’s large mines have potentially acid producing ore, but none are truly comparable with the size of the proposed Pebble mine. The Pebble Mine is unique compared to Alaska’s other large, hard rock mines when looking at characteristics such as size, geochemistry, geomorphology, fisheries, and hydrology. When viewed through the aggregate of these factors, the Pebble mine is distinctly different from any other present or past hard rock mine in Alaska. More important is Pebble’s massive potential to impact the pristine lands with industrial development. The Bristol Bay watershed is unique in Alaska because it comprises Alaska’s, and one of the world’s, greatest salmon fisheries. It supports cultural, subsistence, commercial, recreational, economic, and environmental values that are unparalleled.
    [Show full text]
  • EPA Comments to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on Draft EIS for Pebble Project
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 10 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 155 Seattle, WA 98101-3123 OFFICE OF REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR JUL - I 2019 Shane McCoy, Program Manager U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District 645 G Street, Suite 100-921 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Mr. McCoy: In accordance with our responsibilities under the National Environmental Policy Act and Section 309 of the Clean Air Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has reviewed the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' February 2019 Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Pebble Project (CEQ Number 20190018; EPA Region 10 Project Number 18-0002-COE). The EPA is also supporting the Corps in development of specific sections of the EIS as a cooperating agency in accordance with the cooperating agency agreement. As a cooperating agency, we have participated in meetings and provided comments on early drafts of EIS material, including on sections of the Preliminary DEIS in December 2018. We also provided scoping comments to the Corps on June 29, 2018. Project Background The Pebble Limited Partnership (PLP) is proposing to develop the Pebble copper, gold, and molybdenum ore deposit in southwest Alaska. The Pebble deposit lies within the Nushagak and Kvichak watersheds, which together account for more than half of the land area in the Bristol Bay watershed. The proposed project includes an open-pit mine, tailings storage facilities (TSFs), water management ponds, a mill facility, a natural gas-fired power plant, and other mine site facilities. Approximately 1.3 billion tons of ore would be processed at a rate of 180,000 tons of ore per day, over the proposed mine operating life of 20 years.
    [Show full text]
  • The Costs of Climate Change on the Pebble Mine
    2 The Costs of Climate Change on the Pebble Mine By Ariel Silverman January 8th 2020 Cook Inletkeeper • 907-235-4068 • 3734 Ben Walters Lane • Homer, Alaska Cover Photo: Wetlands near the proposed Pebble Mine site in Bristol Bay Photographed by Glennie LeBaron 3 Executive Summary: On Wednesday November 25, 2020, the Trump Administration denied the Pebble Limited Partnership (PLP) a key permit necessary to build Pebble Mine, a colossal proposed gold and copper mine located in Alaska’s Bristol Bay watershed. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Alaska Commander Col. Damon Delarosa stated that USACE rejected the mine’s permit application because the proposed waste treatment plan for Pebble Mine “does not comply with Clean Water Act guidelines,” and “the proposed project is contrary to the public interest.”1 Although USACE’s decision will likely impede Pebble Mine’s construction for the foreseeable future, the mining industry stakeholders can still learn a lot from the mistakes made by PLP executives, engineers, and federal regulators. Most notably, the impacts from anthropogenic or human-caused climate change on the Pebble Mine were overlooked by the mine’s critics and under-analyzed by the project’s federal regulators, investors and engineers. Such oversight would have generated substantial unexpected costs for PLP and unnecessarily burdened Pebble’s stakeholders. Anthropogenic climate change will likely impact future ventures similarly if not properly accounted for in mines’ initial planning and regulation. This report argues that PLP and USACE’s unpreparedness for anthropogenic climate change would have unnecessarily burdened Pebble Mine’s stakeholders with two significant costs: policy costs and operational costs.
    [Show full text]
  • Direct Loss of Salmon Streams, Tributaries, and Wetlands Under The
    The Nature Conservancy 6/1/19 Direct loss of salmon streams, tributaries, and wetlands under the proposed Pebble Mine compared with thresholds of unacceptable adverse effects in the EPA Proposed Determination pursuant to Section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act David M. Albert, The Nature Conservancy, Juneau AK SUMMARY: This study compares the loss of salmon streams, tributaries and wetlands under the 2018 proposed Pebble Mine to thresholds determined to represent “unacceptable adverse effects” by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in its Proposed Determination Pursuant to Section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act (EPA 2014a). Pebble Limited Partnership (PLP) is seeking authorization from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under Section 404 of the CWA to develop the mine, and the Corps has prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) describing the project and its impacts (USACE 2019). Following criteria outlined by EPA, we considered direct and indirect effects that result in the loss of salmon streams, tributaries and wetlands from the discharge of dredged or fill material, inundation within a tailings impoundment, dewatering, or the fragmentation of previously contiguous streams or wetlands. Using data submitted by PLP to USACE on the size and proposed placement of the open pit, tailings storage, and associated facilities, the proposed mine (20-year mine scenario) would result in the loss of 7.5 miles of salmon streams, up to 56.4 miles of tributaries, and up to 4,350 acres of wetlands contiguous with salmon streams or tributaries. These values exceed the EPA thresholds for unacceptable adverse effects by more than half for the loss of documented salmon streams, up to fourfold for loss of tributaries and up to threefold for loss of wetlands.
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Size and Processing Method on the Cytotoxicity of Realgar Nanoparticles in Cancer Cell Lines
    International Journal of Nanomedicine Dovepress open access to scientific and medical research Open Access Full Text Article ORIGINAL RESEARCH Effect of size and processing method on the cytotoxicity of realgar nanoparticles in cancer cell lines Weizhong Zhao1 Abstract: In this study, the effects of the size and Chinese traditional processing (including Xun Lu3 elutriation, water cleaning, acid cleaning, alkali cleaning) on realgar nanoparticles (RN)-induced Yuan Yuan1 antitumor activity in human osteosarcoma cell lines (MG-63) and hepatoma carcinoma cell lines Changsheng Liu1 (HepG-2) were investigated. The human normal liver cell line (L-02) was used as control. RN Baican Yang3 was prepared by high-energy ball milling technology. The results showed that with the assistance Hua Hong1 of sodium dodecyl sulfate, the size of realgar could be reduced to 127 nm after 12 hours’ ball milling. The surface charge was decreased from 0.83 eV to -17.85 eV and the content of As O Guoying Wang3 2 3 clearly increased. Except for elutriation, the processing methods did not clearly change the size Fanyan Zeng2 of the RN, but the content of As2O3 was reduced dramatically. In vitro MTT tests indicated that 1The State Key Laboratory in the two cancer cell lines, RN cytotoxicity was more intense than that of the coarse realgar of Bioreactor Engineering, 2Key Laboratory for Ultrafine nanoparticles, and cytotoxicity was typically time- and concentration-dependent. Also, RN Materials of Ministry of Education cytotoxicities in the HepG-2 and L-02 cells all increased with increasing milling time. Due to and Engineering Research Center the reduction of the As O content, water cleaning, acid cleaning, and alkali cleaning decreased for Biomedical Materials of Ministry 2 3 of Education, East China University RN cytotoxicity in HepG-2, but RN after elutriation, with the lowest As2O3 (3.5 mg/g) and the of Science and Technology, 3Pharmacy smallest size (109.3 nm), showed comparable cytotoxicity in HepG-2 to RN without treatment.
    [Show full text]
  • Permitting Pebble
    PEBBLE WATCH Impartial, educational, and fact-based content related to the development of Pebble mine January 2013 | BBNC Pebble Limited Partnership has said that it intends to release a mine plan Permitting Pebble and file a permit application by the end of fiscal year 2012 (June 30, Permitting any large mine in Alaska is complicated, with federal, state and local permits 2013). needed before development can begin. For the Pebble project, the “cornerstone” permit This timeline may shift, but readers is Section 404 under the Clean Water Act, related to discharging dredge or fill material can get an early peek into large-scale mine permitting in this issue, which (including mine tailings) into waters or wetlands. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers focuses on the permitting process approves Section 404 permits, which are subject to a federal environmental review listed and legislation/regulations that could under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Corps of Engineers will serve affect development of the mine. as the “lead agency” for Pebble permitting, and will be responsible for preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) as part of the NEPA process. “Scoping” the issue the public input process. “The initial Once a 404 permit application is filed design allowed for discharge into a and NEPA analysis begins, the Corps salmon rearing area, but they ended up of Engineers will begin what is called changing the outfall so that it minimized “scoping,” or identifying issues that impact to the Goodpaster River,” she need to be addressed during NEPA said. review. This is when many of the public The type of public input that can participation opportunities happen.
    [Show full text]
  • Ralphcannonite, Agzn2tlas2s6, a New Mineral of the Routhierite
    1 1 Ralphcannonite, AgZn2TlAs2S6, a new mineral of the 2 routhierite isotypic series from Lengenbach, Binn 3 Valley, Switzerland 4 1* 2 3 5 LUCA BINDI , CRISTIAN BIAGIONI , THOMAS RABER , PHILIPPE 4 5 6 ROTH , FABRIZIO NESTOLA 7 8 9 10 1 Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra, Università degli Studi di Firenze, Via G. La Pira, 4, I- 11 50121 Firenze, Italy 12 2 Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra, Università di Pisa, Via Santa Maria, 53, I-56126 Pisa, 13 Italy 14 3 FGL (Forschungsgemeinschaft Lengenbach), Edith-Stein-Str. 9, D-79110 Freiburg, 15 Germany 16 4 FGL (Forschungsgemeinschaft Lengenbach), Ilanzhofweg 2, CH-8057 Zurich, Switzerland 17 5 Dipartimento di Geoscienze, Università di Padova, Via Gradenigo, 6, I-35131 Padova, Italy 18 19 20 21 22 *e-mail address: [email protected] 23 2 24 ABSTRACT 25 The new mineral species ralphcannonite, AgZn2TlAs2S6, was discovered in the Lengenbach 26 quarry, Binn Valley, Wallis, Switzerland. It occurs as metallic black equant, isometric to 27 prismatic crystals, up to 50 μm, associated with dufrénoysite, hatchite, realgar, and baryte. 28 Minimum and maximum reflectance data for COM wavelengths in air are [λ (nm): R (%)]: 29 471.1: 25.8/27.1; 548.3: 25.2/26.6; 586.6: 24.6/25.8; 652.3: 23.9/24.8. Electron microprobe 30 analyses give (wt%): Cu 2.01(6), Ag 8.50(16), Zn 10.94(20), Fe 3.25(8), Hg 7.92(12), Tl 31 24.58(26), As 18.36(19), Sb 0.17(4), S 24.03(21), total 99.76(71).
    [Show full text]
  • Orpiment As2s3 C 2001-2005 Mineral Data Publishing, Version 1
    Orpiment As2S3 c 2001-2005 Mineral Data Publishing, version 1 Crystal Data: Monoclinic. Point Group: 2/m. Commonly in foliated columnar or fibrous aggregates, with cleavages as much as 60 cm across; may be reniform or botryoidal; also granular or powdery; rarely as prismatic crystals, to 10 cm. Twinning: On {100}. Physical Properties: Cleavage: Perfect on {010}, imperfect on {100}; cleavage lamellae are flexible. Tenacity: Sectile. Hardness = 1.5–2 VHN = n.d. D(meas.) = 3.49 D(calc.) = 3.48 Optical Properties: Transparent. Color: Lemon-yellow to golden or brownish yellow. Streak: Pale lemon-yellow. Luster: Resinous, pearly on cleavage surface. Optical Class: Biaxial (–). Pleochroism: In reflected light, strong, white to pale gray with reddish tint; in transmitted light, Y = yellow, Z = greenish yellow. Orientation: X = b; Z ∧ c = 2◦. Dispersion: r> v,strong. α = 2.4 (Li). β = 2.81 (Li). γ = 3.02 (Li). 2V(meas.) = 76◦ Anisotropism: Barely observable because of strong internal reflections. R1–R2: (400) 33.0–36.5, (420) 31.0–35.2, (440) 28.9–33.9, (460) 27.4–31.5, (480) 26.0–30.3, (500) 24.9–29.3, (520) 24.0–28.4, (540) 23.3–27.8, (560) 22.8–27.3, (580) 22.3–26.9, (600) 22.0–26.5, (620) 21.7–26.3, (640) 21.5–26.0, (660) 21.2–25.7, (680) 21.0–25.5, (700) 20.8–25.3 Cell Data: Space Group: P 21/n. a = 11.475(5) b = 9.577(4) c = 4.256(2) β =90◦41(5)0 Z=4 X-ray Powder Pattern: Baia Sprie (Fels˝ob´anya), Romania.
    [Show full text]
  • 10700 Orpiment, King's Yellow PY 39
    10700 Orpiment, King's Yellow PY 39 Chemical composition: yellow sulphide of arsenic As2S3 The origin of the modern name is derived from the Latin term auripigmentum or auripigmento, literally meaning gold paint. Orpiment was once widely used, particularly in the East, but has now fallen into disuse because of its limited supply and because of its poisonous character. The principal sources in ancient times appear to have been in Hungary, Macedonia, Asia Minor and perhaps in various parts of Central Asia. There was a large deposit near Julamerk in Kurdistan. Current deposits of orpiment are in Romania, Hungary, Germany, Greece, France, Italy, Iran, Peru, China, Japan and the western United States. Orpiment occurs as a low temperature product in hydrothermal veins, as a volcanic sublimation product, as a hot spring deposit and in fire mines. It is often associated with stibnite, pyrite, realgar, calcite and gypsum. Orpiment occurs in many places but not in large quantities. Orpiment is usually described as a lemon or canary yellow or sometimes as a golden or brownish yellow with a fair covering power. Microscopically, orpiment is crystalline and may contain orange-red particles of realgar, to which it is closely related. The larger particles glisten by reflected light and have a waxy-looking surface. The toxicity of the arsenic sulfide pigments has been known since early times. The toxic properties of orpiment have been used to advantage to repel insects. Orpiment is said to be incompatible with lead- or copper-containing pigments. Orpiment is not stable in lime and therefore can not be used for fresco, a fact noted by Cennino Cennini inn the fifteenth century.
    [Show full text]