Delineation of groundwater provenance in Arctic environment using isotopic compositions of water and sulphate

Assessment of Sulfate Sources under Cold Conditions as a Geochemical Proxy for the Origin of Sulfates in the Circumpolar Dunes on Mars

“…Similar isotope compositions of secondary sulfate salts have been recently reported for the surficial deposits of Shackleton Glacier catchment (Figure 1), a major outlet glacier of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet located in the Central Transantarctic Mountains [9]. While the negative δ 18 O values are typical for sulfates derived from oxidation of sulfide minerals in Arctic subglacial and proglacial environments [6], the δ 34 S values are more positive than usually found in sulfide mineralization (−30‰ to −10‰ in biogenic sulfides, −3‰ to +3‰ in magmatic sulfides). As a result, atmospheric deposition has been considered as a primary source of sulfates in the Antarctic surficial deposits [7,9].…”

“…The δ 34 S of aqueous sulfate usually closely resembles that of the initial bedrock. While the δ 18 O of sulfate is similar to that observed from evaporitic minerals, the sulfide-derived sulfate inherits the δ 18 O of snow/ice/water present during oxidation of sulfide minerals (e.g., [6]). Our new results of sulfur sequential extraction on 17 surface and near-surface sediment samples from the South Fork of Wright Valley revealed traces of bedrock sulfides (<0.01 wt% S) with a narrow range of δ 34 S, −0.6‰ to +3.0‰ (Table 1).…”

“…One of the difficulties addressing the origin of sulfate in the north polar deposits is limited research and no clear consensus on aqueous sulfate sources in terrestrial polar environments. While sulfide weathering is proposed to be the primary sulfate source in Arctic glacial and subglacial systems [6], an atmospheric origin is favored for sulfate forming under dry polar conditions in Antarctica [7][8][9]. An additional difficulty is that previous geochemical models for Mars [2,4,5,10] are mainly atmospheric origin is favored for sulfate forming under dry polar conditions in Antarctica [7][8][9].…”

Stable Isotopes of Nitrate, Sulfate, and Carbonate in Soils From the Transantarctic Mountains, Antarctica: A Record of Atmospheric Deposition and Chemical Weathering

“…Sulfate was then precipitated as BaSO 4 , after the addition of BaCl 2 (∼10% wt./vol). The precipitate was rinsed several times with DI water and dried at 80 • C. The δ 34 S and δ 18 O values of BaSO 4 were determined using a Costech Elemental Analyzer and a Thermo Finnigan TC/EA, respectively, coupled to a Thermo Finnigan Delta Plus XL mass spectrometer at the Stable Isotope Laboratory at University of Tennessee (e.g., Szynkiewicz et al, 2020). Isotopic values are reported in units of with respect to Vienna Canyon Diablo Troilite (VCDT) for δ 34 S and VSMOW for δ 18 O with analytical precision < 0.4 based on replicate measurements.…”

Assessment of the Mineralization Processes of Potable Natural Mineral Water Using the Chemical Thermodynamics Analysis

“…This recommendation, subsequently, was verified by Cartwright et al [23] and they concluded that Cl/Br ratios and isotopes (i.e., R 36 Cl values, 14 C activities and δ 18 O values) were reliable for reflecting the variations in groundwater recharge. Meanwhile, other environmental isotopes or isotope ratios, such as δ 2 H-H 2 O, δ 18 O-H 2 O, δ 15 N-NO 3 , δ 18 O-NO 3 , δ 11 B, δ 34 S(SO 4 ), δ 18 O(SO 4 ), δ 13 C, δ 2 H, 3 H, 14 C, δ 34 S as well as 37 Cl/ 35 Cl, Ca/Sr, Ge/Si, have also been used to assess the component, salinity or pollution sources of groundwater [24][25][26]. Moreover, geochemical modeling is another critical method to identify the origins of the chemical components of groundwater; and this method has been referenced by numerous studies, such as Ortega-Guerrero [27], Helstrup et al [28], Nassery and Kayhomayoon [29], Ledesma-Ruiz et al [30] and Liu et al [31].…”