<i>δ</i> <sup>34</sup> S measurements on organic materials by continuous flow isotope ratio mass spectrometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sulfur (S) isotope ratios of thoroughly dried organic samples were measured by direct thermal decomposition in an elemental analyzer coupled to an isotope ratio mass spectrometer in continuous flow mode (EA-CF-IRMS). For organic samples of up to 13 mg weight and with total S contents of more than 10 microg, the reproducibility of the delta34S(organic) values was +/-0.4 per thousand or better. However, the delta34S values of organic samples measured directly by online EA-CF-IRMS analysis were between 0.3 and 2.9 per thousand higher than those determined on BaSO4 precipitates produced by Parr Bomb oxidation from the same sample material. Our results suggest that structural oxygen in organic samples influences the oxygen isotope ratios of the SO2 produced from organic samples. Consequently, SO2 generated from organic samples appears to have different 18O/16O ratios than SO2 generated from BaSO4 precipitates and inorganic reference materials, resulting in a deviation from the true delta34S values because of 32S16O18O contributions to mass 66. It was shown that both the amount of structural oxygen in the organic sample, and the difference of the oxygen isotope ratios between organic samples and tank O2, influenced the magnitude of the observed deviation from the true delta34S value after direct EA-CF-IRMS analysis of organic samples. Suggestions are made to correct the difference between measured delta34S(organic) and true delta34S values in order to obtain not only reproducible, but also accurate S isotope ratios for organic materials by EA-CF-IRMS.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".