English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Proyer (2017), the Discussion in this issue of American Mineralogist, disagrees with our recent findings indicating that, in some gem corundum, oriented rutile needles grew by epitactic coprecipitation rather than the usual assumption of exsolution. Proyer’s concerns are, in part, related to a misunderstanding of our model and, in places, his arguments are based upon claims that are not supported by the cited literature. We welcome the opportunity to clarify the matter. However, before starting, it was pointed out to us that the correct term is “epitactic” and not “epitaxial” (Bailey et al. 1978). The term “epitactic” is meant to describe the intergrowth of two minerals having two-dimensional coherence at their interface.

The origin of needle-like rutile inclusions in natural gem corundum: A combined EMPA, LA-ICP-MS, and nano-SIMS investigation—Reply