 
| Received: |
from pop.tamu.edu (pop.tamu.edu [128.194.103.4]) by list.uvm.edu (AIX4.2/UCB 8.7/8.7) with SMTP id JAA54996 for < [log in to unmask]>; Mon, 31 Mar 1997 09:56:47 -0500 (EST)
from geopsun.tamu.edu (GEOPSUN.TAMU.EDU [128.194.195.16]) by pop.tamu.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA27425 for < [log in to unmask]>; Mon, 31 Mar 1997 08:58:09 -0600
from [128.194.195.199] (geol-101lab-05.tamu.edu) by geopsun.tamu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA10025; Mon, 31 Mar 97 08:58:21 CST |
| Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" |
| TO: |
|
| Date: |
Mon, 31 Mar 1997 08:59:08 -0600 |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
| X-Sender: |
|
| Message-Id: |
<v01530500af65800e981b@[128.194.195.199]> |
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
TC:
Try: Hassan, A.A., 1982, Methodologies for extraction of dissolved
inorganic carbon for stable carbon isotope studies: evaluation and
alternatives. U.S.G.S. Water Resources Investigations, 82-6. Also, there
has been some Isogeochem discussion on this. Researchers seem to favor
acid-stripping from water over precipitation of carbonate precipitate
(including me), but the latter is commonly used. See Hassan's study.
Ethan
**********
>Dear Isogeochemers,
>I was wondering if I could obtain a survey of the relative merits of sampling
>ground water for the del-13C of inorganic carbon with either of these two
>
>methods:
>1. Collecting water poisoned by HgCl2 and then acidified by phosphoric acid in
>the lab.
>2. Collecting water with BaCl2 or SrCl2 allowing BaCO3 or SrCO3 to form.
>Filtering the precipitate and then acidifying with phosphoric acid in the lab.
>
>Are there any publications that compare the accuracies of each approach?
>Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, T.C. Onstott
Department of Geology & Geophysics (409) 845-0637
Texas A&M University fax (409) 845-6162
College Station, TX 77843-3115
|
|
|
