2013
DOI: 10.1039/c3ja30375f
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Resolution of inter-laboratory discrepancies in Mo isotope data: an intercalibration

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

24
108
2
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 155 publications
(135 citation statements)
references
References 68 publications
24
108
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The NIST SRM 3134 Mo solution has been proposed as a universal zero-delta reference material for expressing Mo isotope data in delta notation for natural samples (Wen et al 2010, Greber et al 2012, Goldberg et al 2013. As demonstrated by Greber et al (2012) and Goldberg et al (2013) (Dodson 1963).…”
Section: Received 23 Apr 15 -Accepted 10 Aug 15mentioning
confidence: 97%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The NIST SRM 3134 Mo solution has been proposed as a universal zero-delta reference material for expressing Mo isotope data in delta notation for natural samples (Wen et al 2010, Greber et al 2012, Goldberg et al 2013. As demonstrated by Greber et al (2012) and Goldberg et al (2013) (Dodson 1963).…”
Section: Received 23 Apr 15 -Accepted 10 Aug 15mentioning
confidence: 97%
“…As demonstrated by Greber et al (2012) and Goldberg et al (2013) (Dodson 1963). The matrices of these reference materials vary greatly and include igneous rocks ranging from ultramafic to acidic in composition, sedimentary materials, molybdenite, seawater and coral (Table 1).…”
Section: Received 23 Apr 15 -Accepted 10 Aug 15mentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Uncertainties shown in Fig. 1 represent 2 SD of the mean (analytical precision) plus the propagated uncertainty from matching in-house reference materials to the universal standard NIST SRM 3136 where seawater display δ 98/95 Mo = 2.3‰ (75,76). The redox state of the host shales was determined using either Fe speciation or Mo enrichment proxies.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous studies argued that the Ni-Mo enrichments in the sediments could originate from hydrothermal input (Lott et al, 1999;Steiner et al, 2001), enrichment from seawater (Lehmann et al, 2007;Mao et al, 2002), or more likely the combination of both processes (Pašava et al, 2008). Recent studies demonstrated that the Ni-Mo sulfide ore layer, which is usually less than half meters in thickness (Jiang et al, 2006), has relatively lower ␦ 98 Mo values (<1.6‰) (Lehmann et al, 2007;Xu et al, 2012) (low-temperature hydrothermal fluids ␦ 98 Mo = +0.8‰, McManus et al, 2002), while black shales above and below this Ni-Mo ore layer have high ␦ 98 Mo values (∼1.9-2.4‰) (Chen et al, 2015) (modern seawater ␦ 98 Mo = +2.34‰, Goldberg et al, 2013), suggesting that hydrothermal input of Mo may have contributed only to the Ni-Mo ore layer, but not to the adjacent black shales (Chen et al, 2015). Thus Mo enrichment in the black shales resulted from redox processes and could provide information about the ocean Mo reservoir.…”
Section: Cambrian Stagementioning
confidence: 99%