The behaviour of tungsten during mantle melting revisited with implications for planetary differentiation time scales

87Sr/86Sr and trace element mapping of geosphere-hydrosphere-biosphere interactions: A case study in Ireland

“…Experiments were run following the method outlined initially by Eggins et al (1997), with some adaptations to the method for different sample matrices and instrument configurations as reported elsewhere (e.g. Babechuk et al, 2010 for silicate rocks; Lawrence et al, 2006aLawrence et al, , 2006b for natural waters). Processing of instrument response for signal suppression, drift, blank and interference correction, and calibration were performed offline (e.g., Ulrich et al, 2010).…”

“…Processing of instrument response for signal suppression, drift, blank and interference correction, and calibration were performed offline (e.g., Ulrich et al, 2010). Calibration applied preferred concentrations for the United States Geological Survey (USGS) standard W-2a (Babechuk et al, 2010). Experiment specific and long-term compiled trace element abundances determined for several standard reference materials are used to constrain the intermediate method precision at 3% RSD (1s) or better (≤1% for the REE) for the reported analytes and monitor accuracy (e.g.…”

A combined Y/Ho, high field strength element (HFSE) and Nd isotope perspective on basalt weathering, Deccan Traps, India

“…The ICP-MS analyses followed the experimental design of Eggins et al (1997) with the modifications described in Kamber et al (2003) and Babechuk et al (2010), as per the following description. For analysis, an aliquot of stock solution was diluted to produce a 2% HNO 3 solution with an elemental and enriched isotope internal standard mixture containing 6 Li, Rh, Re, Bi, and 235 U in order to correct for the effects of matrix-related signal suppression and instrument drift.…”

“…Following blank subtraction and internal standard, interference, and drift monitor correction, intensities were quantified as concentrations using the laboratory's preferred values for the USGS standard W-2a, as reported in Table 1 for the HFSE and for the other analytes as reported in Kamber et al (2003) and Babechuk et al (2010).…”

“…Overall, the high level of precision indicates that: i) procedural blank levels were consistently low; ii) these elements are relatively homogeneously distributed in the powders digested at Laurentian University; and iii) that laboratory and experimental parameters such as sample dilution, instrument wash-out, and drift correction are suitable for HFSE determination even at very low concentrations (e.g., see Babechuk et al, 2010 for a discussion of factors which influence W determination). A comparison of the long-term mean concentration with literature values (Table 1) suggests that the applied W-2a concentrations used for calibration are accurate; in the event that consensus regarding the concentration of any element in W-2a evolves, all calibrated data can be recalculated relative to the presently preferred values (Table 1).…”