4.7 Article

Precise 206Pb/238U age determination on zircons by laser ablation microprobe-inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry using continuous linear ablation

期刊

CHEMICAL GEOLOGY
卷 175, 期 3-4, 页码 209-219

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0009-2541(00)00394-6

关键词

zircon; U-Pb and Pb-Pb dating; laser ablation microprobe-inductively plasma-mass spectrometry (LAM-ICP-MS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Laser ablation microprobe-inductively plasma-mass spectrometry (LAM-ICP-MS) with a frequency quadrupled Nd-YAG UV laser (266 nm) has been used as a fast and relatively low cost technique to successfully determine the Pb-207/Pb-206 age of single zircon grains with ages older than 1000 Ma; however, it has a problem with serious fractionation in Ph/U during the ablation process of in-situ depth profile analysis. Alternatively, a linear-scan lasts ablation technique was carried out in this study with an ablation size of 15-20 mum in width. 100-120 mum in length and 15-10 mum in depth on single zircon crystals. Constant focusing of the laser beam on the polished zircon crystal is maintained, which successfully minimized the fractionation in Pb/U during the ablation process. Using this method, typical precision of the measurement for Pb-206/U-238 ratios determined on single zircons is improved to 0.8-5%. Thus, the LAM-ICP-MS technique is capable not only of achieving precise Pb-207/Pb-206 ages at about the 1% level for > 1000 Ma zircons, but also of dating Pb-206/U-238 ages with precision of 2-5% for Mesozoic (156-126 Ma) zircons. It is likely that this simple and relatively low cost technique is able to achieve age results even comparable to the SHRIMP-type ion probe in the measurement of the relatively large (> 100 mum) and homogeneous zircons. However, it still has the disadvantage of lower spatial resolution, which limits its application to precise dating of small and/or heterogeneous zircons of Phanerozoic ages. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science 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