Lumping and splitting: Toward a classification of mineral natural kinds

How does one best subdivide nature into kinds? All classification systems require rules for lumping similar objects into the same category, while splitting differing objects into separate categories. Mineralogical classification systems are no exception. Our work in placing mineral species within their evolutionary contexts necessitates this lumping and splitting because we classify "mineral natural kinds" based on unique combinations of formational environments and continuous temperature-pressure-composition phase space. Consequently, we lump two minerals into a single natural kind only if they: (1) are part of a continuous solid solution; (2) are isostructural or members of a homologous series; and (3) form by the same process. A systematic survey based on these criteria suggests that 2310 (similar to 41%) of 5659 IMA-approved mineral species can be lumped with one or more other mineral species, corresponding to 667 "root mineral kinds," of which 353 lump pairs of mineral species, while 129 lump three species. Eight mineral groups, including cancrinite, eudialyte, hornblende, jahnsite, labuntsovite, satorite, tetradymite, and tourmaline, are represented by 20 or more lumped IMA-approved mineral species. A list of 5659 IMA-approved mineral species corresponds to 4016 root mineral kinds according to these lumping criteria.