Skip Navigational Links
LISTSERV email list manager
LISTSERV - LIST.UVM.EDU
LISTSERV Menu
Log In
Log In
LISTSERV 17.5 Help - ISOGEOCHEM Archives
LISTSERV Archives
LISTSERV Archives
Search Archives
Search Archives
Register
Register
Log In
Log In

ISOGEOCHEM Archives

Stable Isotope Geochemistry

ISOGEOCHEM@LIST.UVM.EDU

Menu
LISTSERV Archives LISTSERV Archives
ISOGEOCHEM Home ISOGEOCHEM Home

Log In Log In
Register Register

Subscribe or Unsubscribe Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Search Archives Search Archives
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Date:
Fri, 13 Mar 1998 11:05:05 +0100
Reply-To:
Stable Isotope Geochemistry <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: Barium in carbonates AND ITS RELATION TO ISOTOPES
From:
Graham Shields <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:
<l03110701b12ea13f51bc@[134.225.83.13]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Sender:
Stable Isotope Geochemistry <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (49 lines)
Dear Max,

Thanks for making the connection between C isotopes and Ba concentration. I
am not bold enough to jump so far as yet. The best correlation I have ever
seen was in Cretaceous limestones between d13C and Mn. IMHO these things
ought to be discussed more in the literature in a context other than simply
diagenesis.

>I cannot guarantee that we are not measuring detrital silicates or trace
>barite.  We measure Si and Al to look for relationships in a suite of
>samples  which would suggest a detrital origin for the elements of real
>interest.
>
>We have many limestone data with Ba at over 1000 ppm.  When nature plays
>fair we have seen nice negatively-correlated linear relationships between
>Ba and delta 13-C in a series of rocks; and although I cannot PROVE that it
>is not trace barite, it still indicates operation of a systematic process.

Trace barite will of course dissolve in a limited way if present. However,
I have observed no changes in Ba concentration or Sr/Ba ratio between HCl,
HNO3, acetic acid or buffered solution (pH=4.9) leachates of >98% pure
limestones, which indicates that Ba is really in the carbonate. The next
test is SEM and microprobe analysis.

>In some cases we can be fairly sure that the Ba is in the carbonate -
>measurements on samples from exceptionally-preserved Jurassic fauna - still
>aragonite and uncompacted - give values over 1000 ppm (and a negative
>correlation with delta 13-C)

Yes, this is one thing I have been thinking. Do high Ba concentrations
indicate, perhaps better than high Sr, that the original carbonate phase
was aragonite? In my samples, I have Ba between 50 to 2000 ppm, whereas Sr
varies between 700 and 4500 ppm (with only slight correlation between the
two). Sr and Ba contents (and very low Mg contents) indicate that the
original phase was aragonite.
Also negative correlation between d13C and Ba could be argued as you
mention. I will get in touch with Dr Gruszynski asap. Cheers,

Graham

Graham Shields
Centre de Géochimie de la surface (CNRS)
1 rue Blessig
F-67084 Strasbourg
France

Tel: 0033 3 88 35 86 27
Fax: 0033 3 88 36 72 35

ATOM RSS1 RSS2

LIST.UVM.EDU CataList Email List Search Powered by LISTSERV