Welcome to the new version of CaltechAUTHORS. Login is currently restricted to library staff. If you notice any issues, please email coda@library.caltech.edu
Published March 2021 | Published
Journal Article Open

Sub-Permil Interlaboratory Consistency for Solution‐Based Boron Isotope Analyses on Marine Carbonates

Abstract

Boron isotopes in marine carbonates are increasingly used to reconstruct seawater pH and atmospheric pCO₂ through Earth's history. While isotope ratio measurements from individual laboratories are often of high quality, it is important that records generated in different laboratories can equally be compared. Within this Boron Isotope Intercomparison Project (BIIP), we characterised the boron isotopic composition (commonly expressed in δ¹¹B) of two marine carbonates: Geological Survey of Japan carbonate reference materials JCp‐1 (coral Porites) and JCt‐1 (giant clam Tridacna gigas). Our study has three foci: (a) to assess the extent to which oxidative pre‐treatment, aimed at removing organic material from carbonate, can influence the resulting δ¹¹B; (b) to determine to what degree the chosen analytical approach may affect the resultant δ¹¹B; and (c) to provide well‐constrained consensus δ¹¹B values for JCp‐1 and JCt‐1. The resultant robust mean and associated robust standard deviation (s*) for un‐oxidised JCp‐1 is 24.36 ± 0.45‰ (2s*), compared with 24.25 ± 0.22‰ (2s*) for the same oxidised material. For un‐oxidised JCt‐1, respective compositions are 16.39 ± 0.60‰ (2s*; un‐oxidised) and 16.24 ± 0.38‰ (2s*; oxidised). The consistency between laboratories is generally better if carbonate powders were oxidatively cleaned prior to purification and measurement.

Additional Information

© 2020 The Authors. Geostandards and Geoanalytical Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International Association of Geoanalysts. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Issue Online: 09 March 2021; Version of Record online: 11 November 2020; Accepted manuscript online: 06 October 2020; Manuscript accepted: 22 September 2020; Manuscript received: 09 June 2020. Open access funding enabled and organized by ProjektDEAL. JWBR received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Grant Agreement No. 805246) and from the Natural Environmental Research Council (NERC) grant NE/N011716/1. The authors declare no conflict of interest. Concise constructive criticism provided by two reviewers and the editor Thomas Meisel improved an earlier version of the manuscript and is greatly acknowledged. Data availability statement: All data presented and discussed in this study are presented in Tables 2 and 3.

Attached Files

Published - ggr.12364.pdf

Files

ggr.12364.pdf
Files (874.4 kB)
Name Size Download all
md5:c94b2a63b6273d496f5c709785524f42
874.4 kB Preview Download

Additional details

Created:
August 22, 2023
Modified:
October 20, 2023