Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T15:43:38.391Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Distinction between Chlorophaeite and Palagonite

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

Martin A. Peacock
Martin A. Peacock
Affiliation:
Harvard University.1
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In a recent paper, Dr. L. L. Fermor (12) discusses the composition of chlorophaeite and palagonite and the employment of these terms, with special reference to the present writer's view of this subject, reached principally through a study of the palagonitetuffs of Iceland (11). In an earlier extended study of Indian traps Dr. Fermor had concluded that the orange and brown chlorophaeite-like bodies, often called “palagonite” by the Indian Survey petrographers, are identical with chlorophaeite, and that the similar associated greenish substance, also embraced in the term “palagonite” by these workers, is perhaps, when anisotropic, the chlorite delessite (10, p. 133). One inference from these observations is that palagonite comprises chlorophaeite and the associated green substance; another is that the application of palagonite to these bodies was primarily a misnomer.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Geological Magazine , Volume 67 , Issue 4 , April 1930 , pp. 170 - 178
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1930

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.)

References

REFERENCES

(1) Von Waltershausen, W. Sartorius. 1853. Über die vulkanischen Gesteine in Sicilien und Island und ihre submarine Umbildung. Göttingen.Google Scholar
(2) Penck, A. 1879. “Über Palagonit- und Basalttuffe,” Zeit. d. deutsch. geol. Gesellsch., xxxi, pp. 504–77.Google Scholar
(3) Heddle, M. F. 1880. “Chapters on the Mineralogy of Scotland; Chapter Sixth,” Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh, xxix, pp. 55–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4) Murray, J., and Renard, A. F. 1891. Report on Deep-sea Deposits, based on the Specimens collected during the Voyage of H. M. S. “Challenger” in the Years 1872–1876, London.Google Scholar
(5) Dana, J. D. 1892. System of Mineralogy, 6th ed., New York.Google Scholar
(6) Teall, J. J. H., and Newton, E. T. 1897. “Notes on a Collection of Rocks and Fossils made by the Jackson-Harmsworth Expedition during 1894–1896,” Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., liii, pp. 477–518.Google Scholar
(7) Emerson, B. K. 1905. “Plumose Diabase and Palagonite from the Holyoke Trap Sheet,” Bull. Geol. Soc. America, xvi, pp. 91–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(8) Holmes, A. 1920. The Nomenclature of Petrology, London.Google Scholar
(9) Campbell, R., and Lunn, J. W. 1925. “Chlorophaeite in the Dolerites (Tholeiites) of Dalmahoy and Kaimes Hills, Edinburgh,” Min. Mag., xx, pp. 435–40.Google Scholar
(10) Fermor, L. L. 1925. “On the Basaltic Lavas penetrated by a deep Boring for Coal at Bhusawal, Bombay Presidency,” Rec. Geol. Sur. India, lviii, pp. 93–240.Google Scholar
(11) Peacock, M. A., 1926. “The Petrology of Iceland” (Tyrrell and Peacock), Part I: “The Basic Tuffs,” Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh, liv, pp. 51–76.Google Scholar
(12) Fermor, L. L. 1928. “On the Composition and Nomenclature of Chlorophaeite and Palagonite, and on the Chlorophaeite Series,” Rec. Geol. Sur. India, lx, pp. 411–30.Google Scholar
(13) Peacock, M. A., and Fuller, R. E. 1928. “Chlorophaeite, Sideromelane, and Palagonite from the Columbia River Plateau,” Amer. Mineralogist, xiii, pp. 360–82.Google Scholar