GEM KNOWLEDGE · LABORATORY NOTES
Epidote Zoisite from India
An Indian Ganesha carving examined for its green mineral phases and quartz matrix.
Tested specimen: 92833 (#1) · Report completed: August 16, 2021.
Key finding: The tested piece contains quartz and a mineral in the epidote–zoisite–clinozoisite range. The report describes an intermediate iron and aluminum composition rather than assigning every area to a single end member.
Geological interpretation
Magnesium was not detected in the tested areas. The laboratory considered a skarn or calc-silicate association more likely than a greenschist product of basalt metamorphism. That is an interpretation from this specimen, not a locality determination.
The India provenance is supplied by Soul Body Gems. For a different tested specimen from another locality, see Epidote Zoisite from Peru.
India Ganesha report · specimen 92833
Select a report page to enlarge it.
Understanding the report figures
Use this guide alongside the written findings and the original report transcript. It explains the purpose of each analytical figure and preserves the laboratory’s own figure labels. The interpretations apply to the tested specimen; signals alone do not establish the identity of every similar-looking stone.
-
Electron microscope image: This view shows small-scale regions selected for analysis. Its brightness contrast helps distinguish regions with different compositions; it is not a photograph of their natural colors. Numbered spots connect this view to the analyses listed in the report.
Laboratory figure caption: Fig. 2: Backscattered electron images of the specimen.
-
Elemental spectrum: The peaks record characteristic X-ray signals from elements in the analyzed spot or area. This is an analysis of that location, not automatically of the entire specimen. Any mineral identification or uncertainty named in the laboratory caption is retained below.
Laboratory figure caption: Fig. 3: Energy dispersive spectral analysis of spot 1 in Fig. 2. (epidote/clinozoisite-zoisite)
-
Elemental spectrum: The peaks record characteristic X-ray signals from elements in the analyzed spot or area. This is an analysis of that location, not automatically of the entire specimen. Any mineral identification or uncertainty named in the laboratory caption is retained below.
Laboratory figure caption: Fig. 4: Energy dispersive spectral analysis of spot 2 in Fig. 2. (quartz)
-
Element map: This map shows where the named elements occur within the analyzed area. Its colors represent the laboratory’s selected element channels, rather than the specimen’s visible colors. The caption below preserves any color key or distribution noted by the laboratory.
Laboratory figure caption: Fig. 5: X-ray map of Fig. 2. Calcium: orange, silicon: green.
Read the report as text
This transcription makes the laboratory findings, figure captions, and table values available without opening the page images. Refer to the original images above for visual details.
Laboratory report
Analytical Result Report Sample id: 92833(#1, Ganesha) Submitted by: K. Bitner Date submitted: Aug.2, 2021. Date completed: Aug. 16, 2021. Operating conditions: An AMRAY 1830 SEM operated at 25 kV acceleration potential, 26 mm working distance, 15 degrees sample tilt, coated with 250 Å carbon. Using the X-ray fluorescence attachment with 35 kV potential in conjunction with the EDS system. Fig. 1: Photograph of the specimen. 6 cm maximum dimension. Fig. 2: Backscattered electron images of the specimen. Fig. 3: Energy dispersive spectral analysis of spot 1 in Fig. 2. (epidote/clinozoisite-zoisite) Fig. 4: Energy dispersive spectral analysis of spot 2 in Fig. 2. (quartz) Fig. 5: X-ray map of Fig. 2. Calcium: orange, silicon: green. Table 1: Trace and minor elements in the specimen. (in wt. %). Titanium 0.34 Manganese 0.03 Strontium 0.10 Chromium 0.01 Phosphorus 0.01 Summary of findings: This specimen (Fig. 1) is Composed of epidote/zoisite-clinozoisite and quartz (Figs. 2-5). Table 1 displays some of the minor and trace elements. The epidote group consists of several species which include epidote, zoisite, clinozoisite. The difference is the amount of trivalent iron versus aluminum. This material contains a mineral in between the iron and aluminum contents. Notably, magnesium was not detected. Thus, it appears that this is probably more skarn or calc silicate related than a greenschist metamorphic product of basalt metamorphism. Date: Aug. 16, 2021 Signature