^1,2M. Kimura,^3,4M. K. Weisberg,¹A. Yamaguchi
Meteoritics & Planetary Science (in Press) Open Access Link to Article [https://doi.org/10.1111/maps.14129]
¹National Institute of Polar Research, Tokyo, Japan
²Ibaraki University, Mito, Japan
³Kingsborough College and Graduate Center of the City University of New York, New York City, New York, USA
⁴American Museum of Natural History, New York City, New York, USA
Published by arrangement with John Wiley & Sons

Type 3 chondrites are subdivided into 3.0–3.9. Subtype 3.0 chondrites nearly preserve all of their primitive features. Many criteria have been proposed to distinguish such primitive chondrites. Here, we compiled mineral data and reconsider the petrologic classification criteria for subtype 3.0. Chondrites are classified into subtypes by the minor element distribution of olivine and textural and chemical features of Fe-Ni metal. The []Si4O8 and MgO components of feldspar also distinguish subtype 3.0 from subtypes ≥3.1. Other features, such as the occurrence of near pure chromite, are also indicators of subtype 3.0. It is difficult to distinguish between subtypes 3.0 and ≤2.9 based on mineral chemistry. Therefore, we propose the following criteria to distinguish between subtypes 3.0 and ≤2.9. In type 3.0 chondrites, major silicate (olivine, pyroxene, and plagioclase), oxide, metal, and sulfide minerals do not show aqueous alteration features. Melilite, anorthite, and glass show no or mild aqueous alteration features. Subtype 3.0 has not been identified in all chondrite groups. The absence of subtype 3.0 from some groups mainly reflects differences in the degrees of secondary parent body processes among the chondrite groups.