You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When Pbc is >blank Pbc, one has the option of partitioning the Pbc subtraction from reservoirs with different compositions (blank + Stacey and Kramers, e.g.). However, if the sample is spiked with ET2535, this function does not work. While it is uncommon to need this (given that if Pbc is an issue, mass fractionation is not likely a big source of uncertainty), in working on a subset of very rare and very old zircons, it was a good idea to spike and analyze some leachates from chemical abrasion derived from step leaching single zircons. These leachates have a couple pg of Pbc instead of the usual and it would be nice to be able to test the sensitivity of those dates to the Pbc correction.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
When Pbc is >blank Pbc, one has the option of partitioning the Pbc subtraction from reservoirs with different compositions (blank + Stacey and Kramers, e.g.). However, if the sample is spiked with ET2535, this function does not work. While it is uncommon to need this (given that if Pbc is an issue, mass fractionation is not likely a big source of uncertainty), in working on a subset of very rare and very old zircons, it was a good idea to spike and analyze some leachates from chemical abrasion derived from step leaching single zircons. These leachates have a couple pg of Pbc instead of the usual and it would be nice to be able to test the sensitivity of those dates to the Pbc correction.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: