4.7 Article

Iron and nickel isotope fractionation by diffusion, with applications to iron meteorites

期刊

EARTH AND PLANETARY SCIENCE LETTERS
卷 451, 期 -, 页码 159-167

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.epsl.2016.06.030

关键词

experimental geochemistry; Fe isotope fractionation; meteorites; diffusion

资金

  1. NASA [NNX13AH09G S01, NNX11AG78G, NNX14AI19G]
  2. NASA [NNX11AG78G, 145995, 681260, NNX14AI19G] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mass-dependent, kinetic fractionation of isotopes through processes such as diffusion can result in measurable isotopic signatures. When these signatures are retained in geologic materials, they can be used to help interpret their thermal histories. The mass dependence of the diffusion coefficient of isotopes 1 and 2 can be written as (D-1/D-2) = (m(2)/m(1))(beta), where D-1 and D-2 are the diffusion coefficients of m(1) and m(2) respectively, and beta is an empirical coefficient that relates the two ratios. Experiments have been performed to measure beta in the Fe-Ni alloy system. Diffusion couple experiments between pure Fe and Ni metals were run in a piston cylinder at 1300-1400 degrees C and 1 GPa. Concentration and isotopic profiles were measured by electron microprobe and ion microprobe respectively. We find that a single beta coefficient of beta = 0.32 +/- 0.04 can describe the isotopic effect in all experiments. This result is comparable to the isotope effect determined in many other similar alloy systems. The new beta coefficient is used in a model of the isotopic profiles to be expected during the Widmanstatten pattern formation in iron meteorites. The results are consistent with previous estimates of the cooling rate of the iron meteorite Toluca. The application of isotopic constraints based on these results in addition to conventional cooling rate models could provide a more robust picture of the thermal history of these early planetary bodies. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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