Abstract Details
(2020) An Analytical Technique of Trace Elements Using LA-ICP-MS for Tephra Identification
Kagami S, Yokoyama T & Umeda K
https://doi.org/10.46427/gold2020.1233
The author has not provided any additional details.
06n: Room 2, Wednesday 24th June 23:27 - 23:30
Saya Kagami
View all 2 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020
View abstracts at 3 conferences in series
Tatsunori Yokoyama View all 2 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020 View abstracts at 4 conferences in series
Koji Umeda View abstracts at 6 conferences in series
Tatsunori Yokoyama View all 2 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020 View abstracts at 4 conferences in series
Koji Umeda View abstracts at 6 conferences in series
Listed below are questions that have been submitted by the community that the author will try and cover in their presentation. To submit a question, ensure you are signed in to the website. Authors or session conveners approve questions before they are displayed here.
Submitted by Yuri Amelin on Wednesday 24th June 11:57
You mentioned that ICP-AES is an established method for chemical analysis of tephras, but only for bulk samples. Can you use ICP-AES in combination with laser ablation? If not, what prevents it (e.g. insufficient sensitivity)? If yes, how would it compare with LA-ICP-MS for the elements where the concentrations of elements are high enough for both methods?
Thank you, Amelin. In some case, ICP-AES is used with LA system. However, in our laboratory, an ICP-AES and an LA system are in separate room, so we have not tried the LA-ICP-AES analysis. Some previous studies used LA-ICP-AES for major elements, and performed in-situ analyses. However, detection limit by LA-ICP-MS is lower than that by LA-ICP-AES, and then I think the LA-ICP-MS method is suitable for trace elements. Especially, abundances of heavy REEs in some tephra glasses are nearly equal to quantitative limit by LA-ICP-MS. About your question of “How would LA-ICP-AES compare with LA-ICP-MS for the elements where the concentrations of elements are high enough for both methods”, I don’t know which methods we should use. Major elements are interfered by many isobars, so ICP-AES may be suitable for them compared with ICP-MS. On the other hand, easily ionized elements such as alkaline elements are not suitable for LA-ICP-AES analysis. In our laboratory, we analyze major elements by EPMA before trace elements analysis by LA-ICP-MS. If possible, I will try to use both of LA-ICP-AES and LA-ICP-MS by splitting sample gas flow and then we could obtain major and trace element compositions from the same position.
You mentioned that ICP-AES is an established method for chemical analysis of tephras, but only for bulk samples. Can you use ICP-AES in combination with laser ablation? If not, what prevents it (e.g. insufficient sensitivity)? If yes, how would it compare with LA-ICP-MS for the elements where the concentrations of elements are high enough for both methods?
Thank you, Amelin. In some case, ICP-AES is used with LA system. However, in our laboratory, an ICP-AES and an LA system are in separate room, so we have not tried the LA-ICP-AES analysis. Some previous studies used LA-ICP-AES for major elements, and performed in-situ analyses. However, detection limit by LA-ICP-MS is lower than that by LA-ICP-AES, and then I think the LA-ICP-MS method is suitable for trace elements. Especially, abundances of heavy REEs in some tephra glasses are nearly equal to quantitative limit by LA-ICP-MS. About your question of “How would LA-ICP-AES compare with LA-ICP-MS for the elements where the concentrations of elements are high enough for both methods”, I don’t know which methods we should use. Major elements are interfered by many isobars, so ICP-AES may be suitable for them compared with ICP-MS. On the other hand, easily ionized elements such as alkaline elements are not suitable for LA-ICP-AES analysis. In our laboratory, we analyze major elements by EPMA before trace elements analysis by LA-ICP-MS. If possible, I will try to use both of LA-ICP-AES and LA-ICP-MS by splitting sample gas flow and then we could obtain major and trace element compositions from the same position.
Submitted by Bryant Ware on Wednesday 24th June 15:55
Very interesting additional tephra characterization technique than the traditional physical observation approaches. What would be the ultimate goal and outcome of a geochemical tephra catalogue?
Thank you, Bryant. The ultimate goal is to categorize wide-spread tephras by physical observation and our analytical method. We can date a bed including tephras by the tephra catalogue, even if we cannot apply carbon-14 method for dating.
Very interesting additional tephra characterization technique than the traditional physical observation approaches. What would be the ultimate goal and outcome of a geochemical tephra catalogue?
Thank you, Bryant. The ultimate goal is to categorize wide-spread tephras by physical observation and our analytical method. We can date a bed including tephras by the tephra catalogue, even if we cannot apply carbon-14 method for dating.
Submitted by Saya Kagami on Thursday 25th June 00:04
Thank you, Bryant. The ultimate goal is to categorize wide-spread tephras by physical observation and our analytical method. We can date a bed including tephras by the tephra catalogue, even if we cannot apply carbon-14 method for dating.
Thank you, Bryant. The ultimate goal is to categorize wide-spread tephras by physical observation and our analytical method. We can date a bed including tephras by the tephra catalogue, even if we cannot apply carbon-14 method for dating.
Sign in to ask a question.