Organic contamination on the surface of meteorites as a function of space and time: A case study of the Buzzard Coulee H4 chondrite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The study of organic compounds in astromaterials represents a unique window into organic matter in the interstellar medium, the solar nebula, and asteroid parent bodies, and insights into pathways that may relate organic matter in these diverse environments. Unfortunately, the Earth’s surface is awash in organic material, which forms a significant source of contamination, especially for specimens of meteorite falls. Here, we employ specimens of the Buzzard Coulee H4 ordinary chondrite, the fall of which in western Saskatchewan, Canada, on November 20, 2008 was widely documented, and from which meteorites were recovered starting shortly after the fall and continuing to over 10 years later. The low intrinsic organic matter content of these H4 specimens enables their use as “blanks” for terrestrial contamination. Using dichloromethane rinses of meteorite specimen exteriors, and analysis of organic compounds by gas chromatograph‐mass spectrometry, we document the sources of terrestrial contamination as a function of location, time of collection relative to the fall, and curation and handling since collection. We find numerous terrestrial organic compounds, most of which can be attributed to the terrestrial surface on which the meteorite specimens were collected, and we consider a variety of factors that may influence the degree of contamination. To determine the source of each contaminant more accurately, we advocate for the collection of terrestrial materials (e.g., soil, vegetation) alongside meteorites. Our results have implications for how specimens from meteorite falls—especially for meteorites expected to have high intrinsic organic content—are collected, documented, and curated.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".