MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971082108 · doi:10.1039/b705677j

Mercury isotope fractionation during volatilization of Hg(0) from solution into the gas phase

2007· article· en· W1971082108 on OpenAlexaff
Wang Zheng, Delphine Foucher, Holger Hintelmann

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolatilisationChemistryMercury (programming language)FractionationIsotope fractionationIsotopeAnalytical Chemistry (journal)VaporizationSulfuric acidAqueous solutionEquilibrium fractionationChromatographyInorganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this work was to determine the magnitude of mercury isotope fractionation during volatilization of Hg(0) dissolved in aqueous solution to the gas phase and to develop a method for the precise determination of isotope ratios of gaseous Hg(0) by multi-collector ICP-MS. Hg(0) was generated in situ by reducing Hg(II) using SnCl2 and subsequently purged into a trapping solution. A 316 μM KMnO4 trapping solution, acidified by 0.9 M sulfuric acid, recovered 96.1 ± 4.0% of Hg (2 SD, n = 20). The observed δ202Hg of −0.049 ± 0.065‰ (2 SD, n = 17) relative to the initial Hg standard was not greater than the daily external precision of the isotope ratio measurement, which is typically <0.100‰ (2 SD). The volatilization experiments were conducted by reducing Hg(II) completely using SnCl2, letting the developed Hg(0) evaporate from solution and purging the Hg(0) vapor in the headspace over the solution into the trapping solutions. The concentration and isotope ratios of Hg in both the trapping solutions and the Hg(0) remaining in solution were measured at different time intervals. The kinetics of the volatilization was found to be a first order process. The pattern of isotope fractionation during volatilization followed a Rayleigh fractionation with an observed maximum δ202Hg value of 1.48 ± 0.07‰ (2 SD). Fractionation factors of 1.00044 and 1.00047 were obtained in two independent experiments. These results provide the first experimental proof for, and quantified the pattern and magnitude of, the Hg isotope fractionation during volatilization of Hg(0) from solution into the gas phase.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations186
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Analytical Atomic SpectrometrySame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207