Effect of chemical abrasion of zircon on SIMS U–Pb, <i>δ</i> <sup>18</sup> O, trace element, and LA-ICPMS trace element and Lu–Hf isotopic analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. This study assesses the effect of chemical abrasion on in situ mass spectrometric isotopic and elemental analyses in zircon. Chemical abrasion improves the U–Pb systematics of SIMS (secondary ion mass spectrometry) analyses of reference zircons, while leaving other isotopic systems largely unchanged. SIMS 206Pb/238U ages of chemically abraded reference materials TEMORA-2, 91500, QGNG, and OG1 are precise to within 0.25 % to 0.4 % and are within uncertainty of chemically abraded TIMS (thermal ionization mass spectrometry) reference ages, while SIMS 206Pb/238U ages of untreated zircons are within uncertainty of TIMS reference ages where chemical abrasion was not used. Chemically abraded and untreated zircons appear to cross-calibrate within uncertainty using all but one possible permutation of reference materials, provided that the corresponding chemically abraded or untreated reference age is used for the appropriate material. In the case of reference zircons QGNG and OG1, which are slightly discordant, the SIMS U–Pb ages of chemically abraded and untreated material differ beyond their respective 95 % confidence intervals. SIMS U–Pb analysis of chemically abraded zircon with multiple growth stages is more difficult to interpret. Treated igneous rims on zircon crystals from the S-type Mount Painter Volcanics are much lower in common Pb than the rims on untreated zircon grains. However, the analyses of chemically abraded material show excess scatter. Chemical abrasion also changes the relative abundance of the ages of zircon cores inherited from the sedimentary protolith, presumably due to some populations being more likely to survive the chemical abrasion process than others. We consider these results from inherited S-type zircon cores to be indicative of results for detrital zircon grains from unmelted sediments. Trace element, δ18O, and εHf analyses were also performed on these zircons. None of these systems showed substantial changes as a result of chemical abrasion. The most discordant reference material, OG1, showed a loss of OH as a result of chemical abrasion, presumably due to dissolution of hydrous metamict domains or thermal dehydration during the annealing step of chemical abrasion. In no case did zircon gain fluorine due to exchange of lattice-bound substituted OH or other anions with fluorine during the HF partial dissolution phase of the chemical abrasion process. As the OG1, QGNG, and TEMORA-2 zircon samples are known to be compositionally inhomogeneous in trace element composition, spot-to-spot differences dominated the trace element results. Even the 91500 megacrystic zircon pieces exhibited substantial chip-to-chip variation. The light rare earth elements (LREEs) in chemically abraded OG1 and TEMORA-2 were lower than in the untreated samples. Ti concentration and phosphorus saturation ((Y + REE) / P) were generally unchanged in all samples.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".