[Slraep]

Originally Posted by Caitlin Williams

Slraep

Where is an article for Kathybear to look at about using Tridacna gigas nucleii? In fireballs?

If they are tridacna gigas nucleii, I would hope that no one who knows what they are, would support it with their dollars.

Hi Caitlin,

All the info is on Pearl-Guide.

http://www.pearl-guide.com/innovatio...-culture.shtml

Hi GemGeek and Cathybear,

I too bought a pair of big fireball earrings before I knew! Now that I do know about the type of nucleus used, you couldn't even PAY ME to own any. If you see the fireball shape, the round part where the nucleus is, and a longish tail---it's FW with a Tridacna nucleus for sure. No doubt about it. They are pretty easy to spot once you've seen some. I'm certain you both can spot them now.

Slraep

[Cathybear]

Hi Slraep,
what did you do with your earrings?
I'll keep these, but I now know not to buy any more.

[Slraep]

Hi Cathybear,

I kept them too. Throwing them away wouldn't make any sense. I just chalked it up to not knowing. I do use them to show friends what not to buy and why. They are very pretty but I have lots of equally pretty things that don't contribute to the decline of a big and beautiful mollusc.

Slraep

[Cathybear]

I thought that too; what's done is done, and burying them in the garden wouldn't change anything - except the dog would probably dig them up! lol

[GemGeek]

The question is, do all fireballs have giant clamshell beads? I thought only the larger ones had them. My Ikecho pearls are gigantic, so the giant clam is clearly involved. I would think that Catherine's pearls have 10mm beads and those are readily available (non clam).

A tail is typical of bead-nucleation of any kind. Here are baroque silver south sea pearls (no clam used). They definitely don't have the long streamer associated with the freshwaters, although I've seen a lot of freshwater pearls shaped just like this, but smaller.



So does anyone know at what size the giant clam nuclei become suspect?

Are they only an issue in Chinese cultured pearls?

We know from Slraep that MOP and composite MOP beads are available up to 20mm. Could it really be cheaper to destroy giant clams? That is disgusting, if it's true.

[Cathybear]

So there's hope? I was very excited about them, but now I feel awful

[GemGeek]

Let's see what Jeremy says. He knows the industry like no one else.

[pattye]

Hey, I think it is that article that Jeremy wrote, it is here somewhere, I can't remember what the title is, it was about the fireballs......and how they are nucleated......ok, find in the column, IN THE NEWS, click on it, it will show a number of articles including Jeremy's of mid Aug that talks about the fireballs......

Pattye
so many pearls, so little time

[Slraep]

Okay a 9-12mm nucleus in CFWP is 100% Tridacna gigas. Under that and it's a nucleus made out of local mussel shell(maximum size 7mm) or plastic. You find plastic forms in coin, star, square, rectangle, flower and most stick pearls. At least I think it is plastic. I've broken apart quite a few. If someone knows it is not plastic, please correct me.

The big fireballs(Ikecho), besides being nucleated with a big clam bead, are cultured in the Biwa pearly mussel(Hyriopsis schlegeli) and not the Triangle mussel(Hyriopsis cumingi).

Cathybear, yours are unfortunately big clam nucleated.

Slraep

[GemGeek]

Thanks Slraep! I hope they change to something else soon.

[jshepherd]

Originally Posted by Slraep

The big fireballs(Ikecho), besides being nucleated with a big clam bead, are cultured in the Biwa pearly mussel(Hyriopsis schlegeli) and not the Triangle mussel(Hyriopsis cumingi).

I do not think that is necessarily correct. It is a sensible conclusion because the Chinese are calling them "Ikecho", which is Japanese for Biwa Pearly Mussel. Even Strack came to that conclusion in her lecture in Hong Kong last month. But I think it is wrong.

1. While in Zhuji with Doug we witnessed the use of 12 mm + beads in native Hyriosis Cumingii.

2. Grace Pearl Company has concentrated more than 80% of its efforts on the production on bead-nuke freshwater. The chairman himself told me that less than 30% of their shell is Hyriopsis schlegelii.

I do not think there is a correlation between the big fireballs and the shell. I think the only correlation is the name Ikecho and Biwa Pearly Mussel.

[Slraep]

Originally Posted by jshepherd

I do not think there is a correlation between the big fireballs and the shell. I think the only correlation is the name Ikecho and Biwa Pearly Mussel.

Interesting. I'm tending to think that you are right and Strack is possibly wrong too.

So basically they are shoving big clam nucleii mostly into H. cumingi. Got it!

Slraep

[Pearlgully]

Hi Jeremy,

In the article that both you and D. Fiske wrote, which is wonderful, by the way, you specifically state that, "Two nuclei were tested at GIA's Carlsbad laboratory". Based on the this fact, that only two were tested, is it safe come to a conclusion that all fireballs are nucleated with shell from the giant clam.
I apologize if I sound critical but nothing seems conclusive at this time.
Am I missing something:

Gail

[jshepherd]

Nope. Definitely not safe to conclude that they are all G-C. Henri Hanni found the same thing in shell pearls, however. I personally believe they have the same inside as the fireballs.

But here is something to think about. The fireball and Ikecho pearls are nucleated with large, solid beads. These beads are also white. There are only two legal shells that can produce beads that look similar. They are both from the US. The cost of a single white bead (without heavy striation) would be very high - much more than the cost of an average bead-nucleated freshwater pearl.

We used the word "likely" because without extensive testing of many pearls from many sources it is impossible to be 100% certain, even though no other explanation is viable. We conducted the tests on a couple of random pearls because we could not think of any explanation other than G-C. The test came back saltwater.

[Slraep]

Originally Posted by jshepherd

We used the word "likely" because without extensive testing of many pearls from many sources it is impossible to be 100% certain, even though no other explanation is viable. We conducted the tests on a couple of random pearls because we could not think of any explanation other than G-C. The test came back saltwater.

I have to admit, the word/s "likely" or maybe "very likely" seem more accurate than my 100%. But still, it being saltwater and having to be cheap, unfortunatly points bigtime to the Big Clam.

Slraep