Recommended Nomenclature for the Sapphirine and Surinamite Groups (Sapphirine Supergroup)

Minerals isostructural with sapphirine-1A, sapphirine-2M, and surinamite are closely related chain silicates that pose nomenclature problems because of the large number of sites and potential constituents, including several (Be, B, As, Sb) that are rare or absent in other chain silicates. Our recommended nomenclature for the sapphirine group (formerly-aenigmatite group) makes extensive use of precedent, but applies the rules to all known natural compositions, with flexibility to allow for yet undiscovered compositions such as those reported in synthetic materials. These minerals are part of a polysomatic series composed of pyroxene or pyroxene-like and spinel modules, and thus we recommend that the sapphirine supergroup should encompass the polysomatic series. The first level in the classification is based on polysome, i.e. each group within the supergroup Corresponds to a single polysome. At the second level, the sapphirine group is divided into subgroups according to the occupancy of the two largest M sites, namely, sapphirine (Mg), aenigmatite (Na), and rhonite (Ca). Classification at the third level is based on the occupancy of the smallest M site with most shared edges, M7, at which the dominant cation is most often Ti (aenigmatite, rhonite, makarochkinite), Fe(3+) (wilkinsonite, dorrite, hogtuvaite) or Al (sapphirine, khmaralite); much less common is Cr (krinovite) and Sb (welshite). At the fourth level, the two most polymerized T sites are considered together, e.g. ordering of Be at these sites distinguishes hogtuvaite, makarochkinite and khmaralite. Classification at the fifth level is based on X(Mg) = Mg/(Mg + Fe(2+)) at the M sites (excluding the two largest and M7). In principle, this criterion could be expanded to include other divalent cations at these sites, e.g. Mn. To date, most minerals have been found to be either Mg-dominant (X(mg) > 0.5), or Fe(2+)-dominant (X(Mg) < 0.5), at these M sites. However, X(mg) ranges from 1.00 to 0.03 in material described as rhonite, i.e. there are two species present, one Mg-dominant, the other Fe(2+)-dominant. Three other potentially new species are a Mg-dominant analogue of wilkinsonite, rhonite in the Allende meteorite, which is distinguished front rhonite and dorrite in that Mg rather than Ti or FC(3+) is dominant at M7, and an Al-dominant analogue of sapphirine, in which Al > Si at the two most polymerized T sites vs. Al < Si in sapphirine. Further splitting of the supergroup based on occupancies other than those specified above is not recommended.

Species Assemblages of Leptocephali in the Southwestern Sargasso Sea

Catches of leptocephali of shelf and slope marine eels of the Chlopsidae, Congridae, Moringuidae, Muraenidae, and Ophichthidae collected during a survey in the southwestern Sargasso Sea in late September and early October 1984 were analyzed to learn about their reproductive ecology and larval transport. Sampling along a transect from the Florida Current (FC) out across the southwestern Sargasso Sea and in the Northwest Providence Channel (NWPC) of the Northern Bahamas enabled the evaluation of the larval distributions, abundances and size ranges, regional assemblage structure, and the apparent spawning areas of these marine eels. Distinctly different assemblages observed in the FC and NWPC included the congrid genera Heteroconger, Paraconger, Uroconger, and many ophichthid species, which were rare or absent offshore. Other taxa of congrids, chlopsids, muraenids and moringuids were present in all areas, but the smallest specimens of most taxa were only caught at the NWPC or FC stations. Multivariate analyses reflected higher richness and abundance in the FC and NWPC and also similar species compositions in offshore areas. The patterns of distribution of these leptocephali differed from those of anguillid, nettastomatid, and mesopelagic eel leptocephali collected in the same survey. These findings support the hypothesis that most taxa of marine eels spawn close to their adult habitats, and indicate that despite high biodiversity of marine eels in the Northern Bahamas, only some species of leptocephali appear to get transported far offshore by ocean currents.