Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||How Well Do Non-traditional Stable Isotope Results Compare Between Different Laboratories: Results from the Interlaboratory Comparison of Boron Isotope Measurements|
|Authors:||AGGARWAL Jugdeep; BÖHM Florian; FOSTER Gavin; HALAS Stanislaw; HÖNISCH Bärbel; JIANG Shao-Yong; KOSLER Jan; LIBA Amir; RODUSHKIN Illia; SHEEHAN Ted; SHEN Jason Jiun-San; TONARINI Sonia; XIE Qianli; YOU Chen-Feng; ZHAO Zhi-Qi; ZULEGER Evelyn|
|Citation:||JOURNAL OF ANALYTICAL ATOMIC SPECTROMETRY vol. 24 p. 825-831|
|Publisher:||ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY|
|Type:||Articles in periodicals and books|
|Abstract:||In order to address the correct reporting and therefore comparison of isotopic measurements across different instrument types and instrumental techniques a prepared set of synthetic standards was sent to 28 laboratories for boron (B) isotopic analyses. Standards were prepared from enriched and purified isotopic salts to avoid any sample preparation fractionation. The range in uncertainties of the analyses between different instrumental analytical techniques is as large as the differences within an instrumental analytical technique obscuring any systematic offset. We conclude that uncertainties in the measurement of d11B values were often underestimated and a procedure is suggested to allow a better comparison of the different techniques. Two new standards (JABA and JABB) have been quantified and these are available to all laboratories for testing their analyses. The d11B values of these new standards are 10.0& and 23.7&. The results from this exercise impact on the way all isotope measurements are performed and reported. Guidelines are defined to aid the comparison of measurements between different laboratories.|
|JRC Institute:||Nuclear Safety and Security|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.