Dear Hector, Your question raises a number of competing issues with the result that no single method is likely to provide a unique solution to your problem. The main difficulty lies in the reaction rates of the component carbonates (combined with the relative differences in the isotopic composition of the end-members). My own feeling is that cross-contamination is inevitable and the best you can do is minimise the effects for your own individual circumstances. This means that some mixture will perform better than others when it comes to trying to measure the isotopic composition of the individual components. Firstly, we all know that calcite and dolomite react at very different rates, but it is common for different calcites and dolomites to react at different rates depending on their physical and chemical characteristics. Although the relative difference in reaction rates of the same phase may be smaller, these differences may be critical when attempting to optimise reactions conditions for differential reaction methods. Most experiments that attempt to validate the differential reaction method will have used highly crystalline, near-stoichiometric materials because these materials are pure and readily available. However, these materials often have the greatest differences in reaction rates. This is particularly the case for dolomite - compare the reaction rates of highly-crystalline, stoichiometric hydrothermal or metamorphic dolomites with disorderd calcian dolomites. In addition to these compositional factors reaction rates are strongly dependent on particle size (together with temperature), the degree of separation achieved by differential reaction will depend on particle size statistics. A uniform particle size would provide the best circumstances, but clearly this is impractical. My suggested solution requires a lot more work than the differential reaction method, but might resolve your problem. Much depends on the quantity of sample you have available, but if you have the order of 100mg or more you could try the following method. The procedure is based on: (1) preparing a sub-sample that contains only dolomite by chemically removing the calcite; and (2) measuring the isotopic composition of calcite only by differential reaction. First hand crush the sample and pass it through a 45 micron sieve (this ensures that you have no anomalous coarse particles), then determine the quantity of dolomite and calcite in your sample by XRD analysis. Next split the sample into appropriate amounts. Dissolve out the calcite from one split using the method (with necessary modifications) described by Babcock et al (American Mineralogist, 52, 1563-1567) using Na-EDTA. If performed correctly this should yield a pure dolomite separate that can be analysed following conventional procedures. To measure the isotopic composition of calcite prepare the sample in the conventional way, but weigh out at least double the amount of calcite required for your routine isotopic analysis (obviously you need to take into account the proportion of calcite in your dolomite-calcite mixture) because you will obtain only about 50% of your normal gas yield. I react the samples using a technique in which the reaction vessel is equilibrated at 25oC with the vessel connected directly (using a flexi-section) to a conventional gas extraction line (the constant temperature bath needs to be next to the extraction line so that the vessel remains in the bath at all times). I then react the sample for 30 minutes and after this time collect the gas released by the reaction. Tests show that providing your mixture contains >30% calcite the relative isotopic contribution from the dolomite will be effectively zero unless there are big differences (>10o/oo) between the isotopic composition of the component carbonates. The method described above worked very well for mixtures of dolomite and calcite in metamorphosed limestones, and I believe it would be fine for other systems with appropriate minor modifications. I think you have to accept that you will always get some cross contamination and the magnitude of the effect will depend on the isotopic composition of the end members, the relative difference in reactivity, and the relative abundance of the component phases. People may think that this method is unnecessarily complicated and obviously more time consuming, but I feel that it can be more readily adapted to individual circumstances than differential reaction methods that attempt to measure the isotopic composition of mixtures from a single analysis. Obviously much depends on the number of samples you have to run and the accuracy of the data that you're prepared to accept. Finally, an alternative method would be a simple mass balance procedure in which the isotopic composition of pure dolomite was determined as described above followed by the measurement of a total CO2 yield from a dolomite-calcite mixture. This would effectively do away with the differential reaction procedure altogether. Providing you measured the proportion of dolomite to calcite in the sample the isotopic composition of the calcite could be calculated (taking into account the different acid fractionation factors). Here the accuracy of your XRD method becomes important, although in the right hands it is possible to measure calcite and dolomite concentrations in simple mixtures with a high degree of accuracy and precision. I'd be interested in any comments anyone may like to suggest. Regards, Steve Crowley Dept of Earth Sciences University of Liverpool UK