Original paper

Compositional control of plane group symmetry in tourmalines: an experimental and computer simulated TEM, crystallographic image processing and Mossbauer spectroscopy study

Ferrow, Embaie A.; Wallenberg, L. Reine; Skogby, Henrik

European Journal of Mineralogy Volume 5 Number 3 (1993), p. 479 - 492

21 references

published: Jun 14, 1993
manuscript accepted: Dec 14, 1992
manuscript received: Jun 19, 1992

DOI: 10.1127/ejm/5/3/0479

BibTeX file

ArtNo. ESP147050503004, Price: 29.00 €

Download preview PDF Buy as PDF


Abstract Tourmalines with different compositions show different plane group symmetries in experimental high resolution transmission electron microscopy (HRTEM) when projected along the oaxis. Fe-poor elbaite shows p31m symmetry, while Fe-bearing elbaite shows p3m1 symmetry. Rubellite shows p6 symmetry, while Fe-Mg- Al-bearing tourmaline shows a 'pseudo' p6 type of symmetry. Symmetries p3m1 and p6 are not compatible with the space group R3m assigned to tourmaline from X-ray structural determination studies. The perturbations of symmetry from p3\m to p6 and 'pseudo' p6 depend on the magnitude of the scattering amplitude of the atoms occupying the 3a and 9b sites. Furthermore, computer simulations of elbaite, schorl and dravite show different projected potentials for images down the oaxis. Regions with high mean concentration of light or heavy elements a few unit cells apart are common in Fe-poor elbaite. This results in a marked difference of the distribution contrast in the HRTEM image of elbaite. The Mossbauer effect (ME) spectra of tourmaline are different with different Mossbauer parameters, reflecting the difference in composition. Experimental HRTEM, computer simulation and ME indicate that composition controls symmetry, ME parameters and atomic coordinates in tourmaline, an observation not recorded in other minerals.


tourmalinecompositionsymmetryTEMMossbauer effect.