4.3 Article

Marine sediment pore-water profiles of phosphate δ18O using a refined micro-extraction

期刊

LIMNOLOGY AND OCEANOGRAPHY-METHODS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 110-120

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.4319/lom.2011.9.110

关键词

-

资金

  1. German Research Foundation (DFG) through MARUM Center for Marine Environmental Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Phosphorus cycling in the ocean is influenced by biological and geochemical processes that are reflected in the oxygen isotope signature of dissolved inorganic phosphate (P-i). Extending the P-i oxygen isotope record from the water column into the seabed is difficult due to low P-i concentrations and small amounts of marine porewaters available for analysis. We obtained porewater profiles of P-i oxygen isotopes using a refined protocol based on the original micro-extraction designed by Colman (2002). This refined and customized method allows the conversion of ultra-low quantities (0.5-1 mu mol) of porewater P-i to silver phosphate (Ag-3 PO4) for routine analysis by mass spectrometry. A combination of magnesium hydroxide co-precipitation with ion exchange resin treatment steps is used to remove dissolved organic matter, anions, and cations from the sample before precipitating Ag-3 PO4. Samples as low as 200 mu g were analyzed in a continuous flow isotope ratio mass spectrometer setup. Tests with external and laboratory internal standards validated the preservation of the original phosphate oxygen isotope signature (delta O-18(P)) during micro extraction. Porewater data on delta O-18(P) has been obtained from two sediment cores of the Moroccan margin. The delta O-18(P) values are in a range of +19.49 to +27.30%. We apply a simple isotope mass balance model to disentangle processes contributing to benthic P cycling and find evidence for P-i regeneration outbalancing microbial demand in the upper sediment layers. This highlights the great potential of using delta O-18(P) to study microbial processes in the subseafloor and at the sediment water interface.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据