Nautilus pearl

[SteveM]

Yet another post today, as the source material keeps coming in (and I make a very poor example of the discrete collector!).

Just to remind everyone that I am not convinced about the existence of Nautilus Pearls. But there is evidence in their favor, the nacreous/non-nacreous issue aside.

These posts are offered in an attempt to create a body of awareness for what's actually out there, while the scientific community works to get a handle on the subject.

Here is an enigma, being so large and regularly shaped (21.7ct, 11.8mm x 21.7mm). Having no idea about the anatomical origins of Nautilus pearls?should they exist?one must assume, as I have in a recent post, that the smaller, the likelier.

At first glance this screams shell. Even shell pearls, from a good shell, can display chatoyance and flame structure (see Strack on Cassis Cornuta). But upon requesting top and bottom shots then adjusting brightness and contrast, evidence of a 'swirl' appears at the bottom, such as the swirl in Pearlshooter's image cited by Tom as indicative of Nautilus Pearls. At the very least, this 'swirl' seems to support pearl status, if not (Naut?) Nautilus Pearl.

Comments?

Further speculation?

 

[Caitlin]

Steve
Thank for your follow ups on this subject.

If is isn't a nautilus pearl, could it be an elephant pearl?

 

[SteveM]

If is isn't a nautilus pearl, could it be an elephant pearl?

Or coconut (plenty more where this came from?):

 

[SteveM]

Lola Pearls?

Lola Pearls?

This could also be a new thread, but it is offered as additional evidence in support of non-nacreous pearls from a nacreous shell.

Today I was shown pearls from the Lola shell, found off Java in the past couple of days. Seven in all, all in the range of .5 carat (tiny). In researching the shell I find that it is quite common in the Pacific. More commonly called a Top Shell, in this case the largest example, Trochus Niloticus.

From Britannica Online:

The interiors of all top shells are nacreous. The largest species, Trochus niloticus, from the Indo-Pacific region, was, in fact, once extensively fished for its lustrous mother-of-pearl layer, which was used in the manufacture of pearl buttons.

The pearls are non-nacreous, and of the seven, one is quite nice, with very good flame and chatoyance (no doubt in need of a good loupe for appreciation!).

Anyone heard of Lola Pearls? A search of Pearl-Guide only turned up a dearly-loved family pet by that name.

While I'm at it, anyone know the English name for the mollusc responsible for Semping shell? It's reported to offer a high pearl yield in Indonesian waters.

 

[SteveM]

Back to "the Pearl that closely resembles the Pearl certified by GIA as a Nautilus Pearl" (shades of PRINCE!).

While awaiting delivery of the pearls in posts above, my fascination for this pearl has me continuing to shoot as the moments present themselves.

• Left: Indoor incandescent lighting.
• Right: Bright sunshine.

 

[pattye]

Wonderful photos, Steve! Amazing that it is so round!! The flame is extraordinary!! It appears you are "blazing some new trails" in the world of pearls!

 

[SteveM]

Amazing that it is so round!! The flame is extraordinary!! It appears you are "blazing some new trails" in the world of pearls!

It's a button—potential ring materal!

As for new trails, one might say the gauntlet has been thrown down.

 

[Caitlin]

It could be awhile 'til others catch up with you! What's Tom say?

 

[SteveM]

Have communicated today with someone who has personally found a Nautilus Pompilius pearl (only one thus far in an entire life on the sea). Some of his observations:

• The Nautilus is very seldom encountered live, as they only rise to divable depths late at night.
• The Nautilus is a fast swimmer in deep water. When attacked, it fights back aggressively—using strong, albeit suctionless, tentacles.
• Nautilus shells found have most commonly floated to the surface after the animal has died. The pearl in question was discovered by shaking the shell. It was in one of the enclosed inner chambers (the Nautilus’ prior living quarters), requiring sacrifice of the beautiful shell for extraction.

(This shell-shaking business reminds me of a post of mine that still has me amazed…should try my luck
in the West Pacific!)

The veracity of Nautilus Pearls can be in little doubt to someone having witnessed such a pearl extraction.

The rest of us are just missing the video!

 

[SteveM]

Some progress over the weekend.

Kerang Kasturi mollusk: Cited by one pearl seller as a source for pearls that can be confused with Nautilus Pearls. Very common in Indonesia, this turns out to be the gastropod Bursa Bufo, known alternatively as Lamp Shell, or Giant Frog Shell (no, I'm not seriously considering starting a thread called 'Giant Frog Pearls'!!).

As the 'Nautilus Pearls' in the posts above plus others have been shipped for prospective purchase, I revisited the certification claims made on behalf of the Swiss Gemmological Institute, and GemLab in Leichtenstein, introduced in the following post:

Pictures still welcome?

CLICK for Nautilus pearls (and more)

Response to my inquiry from Dr. Michael S. Krzemnicki, Director, Swiss Gemmological Institute:

"The Swiss Gemmological Institute SSEF does not issue reports identifying these pearls as Nautilus pearls.

"We issued reports on the said pearls mentioning them as non-nacreous natural saltwater pearls.

"The notion of Nautilus was added by the client and is in our scientifc understanding not correct.

"Based on our research on Nautilus shells, using advanced methods such as Secondary Electron Scanning Electron Microscopy, there is no evidence why a nacreous shell consisting of small tabloid aragonite layers as it is the case for Nautilus would produce a non-nacreous pearl showing a flame structure of aragonite fibres."

(The old nacreous/non-nacreous contradiction we've discussed here.)


Response to my inquiry from Dr. Thomas Hainschwang, Director, GemLab:

"Unfortunately the mention of "Nautilus Repertus" is only on the dealers website, not on the reports. We are aware of the controversy and have no proof that these spectacular pearls are indeed from the Nautilus Repertus; there are actually a lot of non-nacreous white pearls that exhibit weakly visible flames, and there are certainly several different mollusks that contain such white pearls. So far we have not found a method to distinguish these, especially having the severe limiting condition that no single Nautilus pearl was found attached to the mollusk.

"On the GEMLAB reports such pearls are identified as "Natural white non-nacreous salt water pearl", and the distinctness of the flame pattern is noted, and a close-up image of the pattern included."

The Indonesian source is recontacting the divers to see if he can recover the original shell from the 21ct 'Nautilus' found just last month. Word is out among the divers that a blister would be very nice to see!

Contrary to some reports, the ONLY certification for a Nautilus Pearl has come from GIA Bangkok, confirmed by GIA New York. Looks like it might be hanging by a very thin thread?

 

[SteveM]

Pearls received today, inspiring a marathon photo session. Nothing to dissuade me from the concept of Nautilus pearls. The unique charactertistics are becoming increasingly evident with exposure, combining or isolating any two or more of the following factors:

• Translucency.
• Regenerative illumination (Tom Stern's 'light from within'. Our Indonesian friend's 'Lighthouse Beacon at Night').
• Flame with hints of iridescence.
• Polar swirl

I've been challenging the divers with citations of other non-nacreous white pearls, and they are ready with good examples of Tridacna, Baler (Melo) Shell, Conch, etc that they distinguish clearly from Nautilus.

The science:

I am in possession of studies demonstrating the manganese levels are consistent in both nacreous and non-nacreous Nautilus shell layers, and that these levels vary according to subspecies.

I am also looking at studies that talk about duality in the nacreous structure of the Nautilus shell wall.

?wondering how much science knows, and what it doesn't?

?????

 

[SteveM]

A closer look at the four pearls:

Top Row:
4.35 grams / 21.75 carats (fished off Sumbawa in August). 20.3mm x 12.1mm tear drop. Luminescent, iridescent (bordering on flame), prominent swirl. Faceted appearance gives a 3D surface look, but skin seems smooth.

Lower Left:
1.52 grams / 2.6 carats (the pearl from the WG ring above).
7.4mm x 7.1mm drop shape, translucent, luminescent, very pale flame.

Lower Middle:
0.11 grams / .55 carats (found in a private collection on Lombok just last week). 4.5mm x 3.6mm drop. Luminescent, riotous flame, translucent. Too small to see a swirl (ever seen a dime so up close and personal?).

Lower Right:
0.74 grams / 3.7 carats (found in a private collection on Lombok just last week). 7.27mm x 9.2mm oval. Luminescent, no flame, symmetrical.

 

[purlgurl]

You know, Steve, at first glance, I dismissed these as being uninteresting, translucent, milky, glassy, all properties we regard with less favour in another pearl.... (ok, ok, I was seduced their flashier sisters' luster & orient....) But they kept calling me back to look again in wonderment at the chatoyance, irridescence, the rings of flames. I could just dive into these limpid pools of hazy opalescence. They also remind me of scudding clouds.
Well done, you won me over.

 

[SteveM]

Well done, you won me over.

Great, but well, that was not the intent! It's about the controversy and the rarity, myth vs. reality and that ever-intriguing incongruity of the non-nacreous pearl from the spectacularly nacreous shell.

The pearls have also won me over (allowing for Pearlshooter/Tim Robinson's excellent photograph on page 2 of this thread of the world's only certified Nautilus Pearl) through repeated and close inspection. There are no real standards (except among the natives who claim to know them well), and the authenticity is not nearly established.

To paraphrase Blaire from earlier in this thread, the good ones are pretty?whatever they are!

 

[pattye]

Steve,

Thanks again for sharing your adventure and the amazing photos!

 

[GemGeek]

great photos!

 

[SteveM]

great photos!

Was pleased to capture the flame in that tiny 3.6mm drop with my Olympus 10MP…more zoom below…

…also looking at studies that talk about duality in the nacreous structure of the Nautilus shell wall.
…wondering how much science knows, and what it doesn't…?????

For those holding on to a glimmer of hope for a Nautilus Pearl 'Happy Ending.'

Fluctuation in shell composition in Nautilus (Cephalopoda, Mollusca)
VINCENT BARBIN
LETHAIA
Barbin. V. 1992

Shell and septum…are deposited by different portions of the mantle epithelium under different conditions at different rates; shell aragonite is deposited in thin bands or layers at the leading edge of the aperture and septal aragonite is deposited simultaneously over the entire surface of the septum over a period of two or three weeks. Precipitation of the shell is continuous, but it occurs at a rate that may vary…whereas precipitation of the septum is episodic and is a response to growth.

(Note: 'Septum' refers to the dividing wall between the chambers built as the cephalopod outgrows one living quarters and moves to the next.)

 

[Nerida]

Steve,

Thanks again for sharing your adventure and the amazing photos!

The intellectual adventure is fun to observe...

 

[DrTKStern]

The Pompilius

The Pompilius

Dear All,

There are some laboratories tht refuse to consider identifying a pearl as a Nautilus because they say, "A non-nacreous pearl cannot come from a nacreous shell.

The following photographs intend to dispel that notion by showing that the interior surface of a Nautilus pompilius, if untreated, is non-nacreous, and that only beneath it is nacre. Thus there is no problem.

The first photo in the series is a Nautilus pompilius from Celebes Sea, some 8.5 inches at its widest, so mature. The interior of the shell is non-nacreous, though it does have a glow from a deeper layer.

A closeup of the interior shows the non-nacreous layer. It will follow in a second posting.

Best,
Tom

 

[DrTKStern]

Untreated Pompilius close up

Untreated Pompilius close up

This is the same shell, but in a close-up of the last portion of the shell. Definitely non-nacreous. Deeper into the throat of the shell, some areas of nacre do show through.

Tom