[Cod-bugs] Posible error.

[Saulius Gražulis]

Dear Rodrigo,

On 2024-10-15 14:01, Rodrigo Garcia wrote:
> Excuse my ignorance, but is the common name for this phase correct?:
>
>     https://www.crystallography.net/cod/7202572.html
>
>
> I thought apatite corresponds to several calcium phosphates, not to 
> the one covered by entry 7202572.
>
I also though that 'apatite' refers to phosphates, not silicates.

The paper, however, claims in the title: "Oxide ion conduction in Ba, Ca 
and Sr doped apatite-type lanthanum silicates", i.e. these are silicates 
that apparently have an apatite-like structure (although I am also not 
an expert in the field). Also, in the source CIFs that are provided as 
supplementary materials and which were the source of the COD data, 
another structure from this paper is called "_chemical_name_common  'Ba 
doped apatite'".

Apparently the authors think that it is appropriate to call their 
investigated materials 'apatite'.

In this case, COD leaves the authors' opinion in the entry. Also, we do 
not regularise '_chemical_name_common' and will probably never do that, 
since this is, eh, a common name which can be different in different 
communities.

In the searches it is better to rely on formula (especially the 
calculated one), systematic names (these might be regularised in the 
future) and crystallographic parameters.

I hope that clarifies the situation and serves you data search needs...

Regards,
Saulius

-- 
Dr. Saulius Gražulis
Vilnius University Institute of Biotechnology, Saulėtekio al. 7
LT-10257 Vilnius, Lietuva (Lithuania)
mobile: (+370-684)-49802, (+370-614)-36366

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.crystallography.net/pipermail/cod-bugs/attachments/20241015/0f6452c9/attachment.htm>