An endmember formula must be: (1) conformable with the crystal structure of the mineral, (2) electroneutral (i.e., not carry a net electric charge), and (3) irreducible [i.e., not capable of being factored into components that have the same bond topology (atomic arrangement) as that of the original formula]. The stoichiometry of an endmember formula must match the “stoichiometry” of the sites in the structure; for ease of expression, I denote such a formula here as a chemical endmember. In order for a chemical endmember to be a true endmember, the corresponding structure must obey the valence-sum rule of bond-valence theory. For most minerals, the chemical endmember and the (true) endmember are the same. However, where local order would lead to strong deviation from the valence-sum rule for some local arrangements, such arrangements cannot occur and the (true) endmember differs from the chemical endmember. I present heuristic and algebraic proofs that a specific chemical formula can always be represented by a corresponding dominant endmember formula. That dominant endmember may be derived by calculating the difference between the mineral formula considered and all of the possible endmember compositions; the endmember formula which is closest to the mineral formula considered is the dominant endmember.

This content is PDF only. Please click on the PDF icon to access.
You do not currently have access to this article.