Florencite-(Ce) mineral
Florencite-(Ce) is the cerium-dominant aluminium phosphate mineral CeAl3(PO4)2(OH)6. It is distinct from other florencite species, the broader crandallite group, cerium as an element and mixed coal wastes containing REE-bearing particles. Li and colleagues (2022) synthesized a cerium phosphate preparation assigned to florencite by powder diffraction and morphology, then examined solid composition after alkaline treatment and subsequent acid leaching. These are abiotic laboratory experiments on a synthetic analogue. Changes in SEM-EDS composition support a qualified preferential-leaching interpretation; they do not quantify a mineral-specific extraction or isolated-product yield. The same article's bulk coal-waste recovery percentages and particle classifications are not transferred to this mineral. Microbial activity, criticality and industrial deployment are unrecorded.
Microbial & Biochemical Mechanisms (1)
Abiotic synthesis and alkaline-acid treatment of a florencite-(Ce) analogue
other
A reagent-derived cerium aluminium phosphate preparation was assigned to florencite by XRD and SEM. Subsequent NaOH treatment increased its solid-phase Ce-to-phosphorus mass ratio, and HCl treatment decreased that ratio. The authors interpret these changes as preferential phosphorus dissolution during the alkaline stage and preferential REE leaching during the acid stage. Solid-composition ratios alone do not measure dissolved inventories, quantitative phase conversion or recovery efficiency.
Experimental Context & Analytical Limits:
The official supplementary synthesis image reports Ce(NO3)3·6H2O in 50 mL water, initial pH 3.85 at 25 degrees C, and dropwise 5 M NaOH to pH 11. After five minutes stirring, the precipitated Ce(OH)3 was centrifuged and washed three times, redispersed in 50 mL water, and combined with Al(OH)3 and 20 mL of 1 M H3PO4. After ten minutes mixing, material was held in a sealed 0.1 L Teflon-lined autoclave at 200 degrees C for three months, cooled naturally, washed with water and absolute alcohol, and dried overnight at 60 degrees C. The recipe writes the Ce nitrate and Al hydroxide inputs as 0.01 M and 0.03 M without unambiguously specifying their amounts or final volume basis; those values are not silently converted to moles. Main pages 7-8 specify 5 M NaOH at 90 degrees C followed by 1.2 M HCl at 90 degrees C for the synthetic preparation. Main page 3 gives two-hour stages and particular solid/liquid loadings for coal wastes, but does not explicitly assign those details to the synthetic-mineral arm; synthetic-arm loading, duration and independent replicate count remain unspecified. Figure 6B compares raw, alkali-treated and alkali-treated plus acid-leached solids; an acid-only synthetic comparator is not presented. This is one study and its supplement, not independent replication.
The official supplementary synthesis image reports Ce(NO3)3·6H2O in 50 mL water, initial pH 3.85 at 25 degrees C, and dropwise 5 M NaOH to pH 11. After five minutes stirring, the precipitated Ce(OH)3 was centrifuged and washed three times, redispersed in 50 mL water, and combined with Al(OH)3 and 20 mL of 1 M H3PO4. After ten minutes mixing, material was held in a sealed 0.1 L Teflon-lined autoclave at 200 degrees C for three months, cooled naturally, washed with water and absolute alcohol, and dried overnight at 60 degrees C. The recipe writes the Ce nitrate and Al hydroxide inputs as 0.01 M and 0.03 M without unambiguously specifying their amounts or final volume basis; those values are not silently converted to moles. Main pages 7-8 specify 5 M NaOH at 90 degrees C followed by 1.2 M HCl at 90 degrees C for the synthetic preparation. Main page 3 gives two-hour stages and particular solid/liquid loadings for coal wastes, but does not explicitly assign those details to the synthetic-mineral arm; synthetic-arm loading, duration and independent replicate count remain unspecified. Figure 6B compares raw, alkali-treated and alkali-treated plus acid-leached solids; an acid-only synthetic comparator is not presented. This is one study and its supplement, not independent replication.
Curated Evidence Points:
Context_only
Source:
ima_2026_09
The exact species row and list definitions establish current name, ideal formula and renamed status. The special-procedure date is nomenclatural history, not a critical-mineral-list edition or a biological claim.
Context_only
Source:
handbook_florencite_ce
The ideal composition and natural Ce-dominant analyses support this species identity. Other REE substitutions are possible; a generic florencite or crandallite-group label in a mixed coal particle is insufficient to assign this species.
Support
Source:
li2022_si
The original embedded synthesis image in sheet 2 explicitly names the Ce nitrate precursor and Ce(OH)3 intermediate and gives the product equation CeAl3(PO4)2(OH)6. This provides the Ce-specific chemical grounding absent from the article title; no organism or biomass occurs in this protocol.
Support
Source:
li2022
PDF pages 6-7, Figure 5 and Figure 6A show rhombohedral particles and a sharp powder pattern compared with florencite reference PDF 43-0673. The authors report no other identified crystalline minerals. This supports the source-assigned synthetic analogue; no quantitative phase-purity fraction, bulk compositional refinement or synthesis yield is reported. Figure 6A is the synthesized-material pattern, not proof of phase identity after both leaching stages.
Partial
Source:
li2022
PDF pages 7-8 and Figure 6B report solid-composition TREE/P ratios of about 2.1 in raw material, 3.5 after 5 M NaOH and 3.0 after subsequent 1.2 M HCl, both at 90 degrees C. The composition axis is weight percent and Ce is the plotted REE; these are mass ratios from SEM-EDS rather than molar ratios or extraction percentages. Preferential dissolution is the authors' interpretation of residue composition; a closed dissolved-plus-residual mass balance, an isolated Ce product and an acid-only synthetic control are not provided. The figure includes error bars, but synthetic-arm replicate count and their statistical definition are not specified.
Partial
Source:
li2022
The generalized crandallite-group formula printed on PDF page 6, RAl3(PO4)(OH)5, differs from both the current species formula and the correctly balanced Ce product equation in the official supplement. The main text points to Schwab et al. reference 32 (2004 crandallite/woodhouseite) for synthesis, while the supplementary synthesis image cites Schwab et al. (1990 rare-earth phosphates). These source discrepancies are retained rather than used to redefine the species or to claim the older experiments were independently checked.
Partial
Source:
li2022_si
The supplement's SEM-EDS procedure selects the highest REE result among several measured spots on a particle, so this is selected local composition rather than a representative whole-sample assay. It specifies Au/Pd coating, whereas main PDF page 4 specifies Pt/Pd; no resolution is supplied. The four coal-particle sheets concern mixed-feed classification and do not supply synthetic-mineral leachate inventories. No coal-waste extraction percentage is attributed to florencite-(Ce).
Sources & References
-
ima_2026_09: IMA-CNMNC. The New IMA List of Minerals, September 2026. PDF page 1 definitions and page 74 Florencite-(Ce) row: CeAl3(PO4)2(OH)6, renamed (Rn), 1987 special procedure; this is not a unique species approval accession.
https://cnmnc.units.it/files/editor/IMA_Master_List_(2026-09).pdf (accessed 2026-10-15) -
handbook_florencite_ce: Handbook of Mineralogy, Florencite-(Ce), complete one-page entry. Natural substituted compositions, ideal CeAl3(PO4)2(OH)6 and warning that chemical analysis is needed to distinguish florencite species.
https://handbookofmineralogy.org/pdfs/florencite-Ce.pdf (accessed 2026-10-15) -
li2022: Li Q, Ji B, Xiao Z, Zhang W (2022). Alkali pretreatment effects on acid leaching recovery of rare earth elements from coal waste of the Western Kentucky No. 13 and Fire Clay seams. Minerals and Mineral Materials 1:7. Complete official 16-page original; synthetic florencite section PDF pages 6-8, Figures 5-6, distinct from coal-waste assays.
https://doi.org/10.20517/mmm.2022.05 (accessed 2026-10-15) -
li2022_si: Li et al. (2022), official SupplementaryMaterials.xlsx. Original images on Florencite Synthesis Procedures (sheet 2, xl/media/image3.png) and SEM-EDS Procedures (sheet 1, xl/media/image1.png and image2.png) inspected. Four other sheets contain coal-particle evidence, not a synthetic-florencite recovery dataset.
https://oaepublishstorage.blob.core.windows.net/020683d7-f854-43cd-b83e-bde768784680/4853-SupplementaryMaterials.xlsx (accessed 2026-10-15)
Curation History
| Timestamp | Curator | Action | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
2026-10-15T08:31:20.203175Z |
codex (GPT-6; codex) | CREATE | Added Ce-specific florencite identity and primary-supported abiotic synthetic-analogue treatment, distinguishing solid composition ratios from mixed-feed or mineral-specific recovery yields and preserving protocol conflicts. |
Record source: data/records/florencite-ce.yaml