UPb LA-(MC)-ICP-MS dating of rutile: New reference materials and applications to sedimentary provenance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In response to the general lack of sufficiently abundant and high quality rutile UPb reference materials for in situ geochronology, we have characterised two new potential rutile ~ 1.8 Ga reference materials (Sugluk-4 and PCA-S207) from granulite facies belts of the Canadian Shield, namely the northern Cape Smith Belt of Quebec and the Snowbird Tectonic Zone (Sasatchewan). Characterisation includes ID-TIMS and LA-ICP-MS UPb dating, imaging, and trace element analysis. We compare these materials with existing rutiles used already (R19 and R10; Luvizotto et al., 2009; Zack et al., 2011) and show that the measured UPb compositions (i.e. including any common Pb) of our rutiles are considerably more homogeneous. This makes possible a UPb normalisation procedure (not reliant upon a common Pb correction) that results in a significant decrease in the uncertainty contribution from the common Pb correction and better reproducibility of reference materials and unknowns for provenance analysis and other applications. The reproducibility is 2–4% (2RSD) for 206Pb/238U and 207Pb/206Pb, only slightly greater than long-term data for zircon reference materials. We show in a rutile provenance study from young orogens (Bhutan Himalaya and Canadian Cordillera) that the sensitivity of our analytical set-up allows dating of ~ 90% of rutiles in a sediment using a 50 μm laser ablation spotsize within samples containing rutile as young as 10–20 Ma, and obviates the requirement for U concentration pre-screening, thus reducing or eliminating rutile selection bias. Unsuccessful analyses are due to poor quality rutiles with predominant common Pb, 207Pb signal below detection, or U content below ~ 1–2 ppm. We have used the ‘207Pb-method’ (using the Tera-Wasserburg diagram) to correct for substantial common Pb in very young and/or very low-U rutiles, rather than developing an on-line correction. Since rutile ages reflect mainly the time of cooling, rutile is a sensitive recorder of metamorphic thermochronological information and therefore is an excellent complement to detrital zircon U207Pb data. The contrast between zircon and rutile signatures in Himalayan samples with rutile as young as 10 Ma is shown to be very dramatic (most zircons from the same sample are > 480 Ma, with only a few grains or metamorphic rims reflecting Miocene metamorphism); as such rutile provides complementary information about the thermal events within the source regions of the grains. Rutile UPb dating is an underexploited provenance method with wide applicability to sedimentary provenance studies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".