MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971478359 · doi:10.1021/ac5025396

Direct Determination of Si Isotope Ratios in Natural Waters and Commercial Si Standards by Ion Exclusion Chromatography Multicollector Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry

2014· article· en· W1971478359 on OpenAlexaff
Lu Yang, Lian Zhou, Zhaochu Hu, Shan Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Chemistry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeochemistry and Elemental Analysis
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersMinistry of Education of the People's Republic of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsChemistryIsotopeInductively coupled plasma mass spectrometryMass spectrometryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)SeawaterIsotopes of siliconIsotope-ratio mass spectrometryAtomic massSiliconChromatographyGeologyAtomic physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silicon isotope ratios in natural waters and several commercial Si standards were determined by online ion exclusion chromatography (IEC) multicollector inductively couple plasma mass spectrometry (MC-ICPMS). As recent studies have shown that mass-independent fractionation (MIF) also exists in MC-ICPMS, e.g., Nd, Ce, W, Sr, Hf, Ge, Hg, and Pb isotopes, the nature of mass bias for Si isotopes was thus investigated. MIF was observed for Si isotopes on both Neptune and Neptune plus MC-ICPMS instruments in this study. Therefore, a standard-sample bracketing (SSB) mass bias correction model, capable of correcting both mass-dependent and mass-independent bias, was employed to obtain accurate Si isotope ratio results in all samples by using NBS28 Si standard as the bracketing standard. Medium resolution was used for all measurements in order to resolve polyatomic interferences on Si isotopes. NBS28 Si standard solutions prepared in nutrient-free seawater and 0.1% NaOH matrix, respectively, were used for the method validation and subjected to the online IEC MC-ICPMS determination of Si isotope ratios. Values of -0.01 ± 0.06 and 0.00 ± 0.06 ‰ (1 SD, n = 10) and -0.01 ± 0.03 and 0.01 ± 0.06 ‰ (1 SD, n = 10) for δ(29/28)Si and δ(30/28)Si, respectively, were obtained, confirming accurate results can be obtained using the reported method for natural waters. Significant variations in Si isotope ratios from -0.72 ± 0.09 to -0.24 ± 0.03 ‰ (1 SD, n = 10) and -1.36 ± 0.11 to -0.46 ± 0.04 ‰ (1 SD, n = 10) for δ(29/28)Si and δ(30/28)Si, respectively, were found among commercial Si standards of NIST SRM3150, SCP Si, and Sigma-Aldrich Si. Values of -0.06 ± 0.07 and -0.20 ± 0.11 ‰ (1 SD, n = 10) for δ(29/28)Si and δ(30/28)Si, respectively, were obtained for the MOOS-3 seawater whereas 0.59 ± 0.11 and 1.19 ± 0.15 ‰ (1SD, n = 10) for δ(29/28)Si and δ(30/28)Si, respectively, were obtained for the SLRS-5 river water. To the best of our knowledge this is the first report of an application of online IEC MC-ICPMS for the high accuracy and precision determination of Si isotope ratios in natural waters. The reported method provides for a relatively rapid (10 min per run) and simple online technique that requires no sample pretreatment for the Si isotope ratio measurements.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations22
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical ChemistrySame topicGeochemistry and Elemental AnalysisFrench-language works237,207