Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T10:45:31.178Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Progress in AMS Target Production of Sub-Milligram Samples at the NERC Radiocarbon Laboratory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

Tanya Ertunç ,
Sheng Xu ,
Charlotte L Bryant ,
Colin Maden ,
Callum Murray ,
Margaret Currie  and
Stewart P H T Freeman
Tanya Ertunç*
Affiliation:
Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) Radiocarbon Laboratory, Scottish Enterprise Technology Park, Rankine Avenue, East Kilbride G75 0QF, United Kingdom
Sheng Xu
Affiliation:
Scottish Universities Environmental Research Centre (SUERC), Scottish Enterprise Technology Park, East Kilbride G75 0QF, United Kingdom
Charlotte L Bryant
Affiliation:
Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) Radiocarbon Laboratory, Scottish Enterprise Technology Park, Rankine Avenue, East Kilbride G75 0QF, United Kingdom
Colin Maden
Affiliation:
Scottish Universities Environmental Research Centre (SUERC), Scottish Enterprise Technology Park, East Kilbride G75 0QF, United Kingdom
Callum Murray
Affiliation:
Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) Radiocarbon Laboratory, Scottish Enterprise Technology Park, Rankine Avenue, East Kilbride G75 0QF, United Kingdom
Margaret Currie
Affiliation:
Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) Radiocarbon Laboratory, Scottish Enterprise Technology Park, Rankine Avenue, East Kilbride G75 0QF, United Kingdom
Stewart P H T Freeman
Affiliation:
Scottish Universities Environmental Research Centre (SUERC), Scottish Enterprise Technology Park, East Kilbride G75 0QF, United Kingdom
*
Corresponding author. Email: [email protected].
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Recent progress in graphite target production for sub-milligram environmental samples in our facility is presented. We describe an optimized hydrolysis procedure now routinely used for the preparation of CO2 from inorganic samples, a new high-vacuum line dedicated to small sample processing (combining sample distillation and graphitization units), as well as a modified graphitization procedure. Although measurements of graphite targets as small as 35 μg C have been achieved, system background and measurement uncertainties increase significantly below 150 μg C. As target lifetime can become critically short for targets <150 μg C, the facility currently only processes inorganic samples down to 150 μg C. All radiocarbon measurements are made at the Scottish Universities Environmental Research Centre (SUERC) accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) facility. Sample processing and analysis are labor-intensive, taking approximately 3 times longer than samples ≥ 500 μg C. The technical details of the new system, graphitization yield, fractionation introduced during the process, and the system blank are discussed in detail.

Type
Articles
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 47 , Issue 3 , 2005 , pp. 453 - 464
Copyright
Copyright © 2005 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

References

Brown, TA, Southon, JR. 1997. Corrections for contamination background in AMS 14C measurements. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics B 123:208–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coplen, TB. 1995. New IUPAC guidelines for the reporting of stable hydrogen, carbon and oxygen isotope-ratio data. Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology 100(3):285–95.Google Scholar
Czernik, J, Goslar, T. 2001. Preparation of graphite targets in the Gliwice radiocarbon laboratory for 14C AMS dating. Radiocarbon 43(2A):283–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dee, M, Bronk Ramsey, C. 2000. Refinement of graphite target production at ORAU. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics B 172:449–53.Google Scholar
Donahue, DJ, Linick, TW, Jull, AJT. 1990. Isotope-ratio and background corrections for accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon measurements. Radiocarbon 32(2):135–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donahue, DJ, Beck, JW, Biddulph, D, Burr, GS, Courtney, C, Damon, PE, Hatheway, AL, Hewitt, L, Jull, AJT, Lange, T, Maddock, R, McHargue, LR, O'Malley, JM, Toolin, LJ. 1997. Status of the NSF-Arizona AMS laboratory. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 123:51–6.Google Scholar
Freeman, S, Xu, S, Schnabel, C, Dougans, A, Tait, A, Kitchen, R, Klody, G, Loger, R, Pollock, T, Schroeder, J, Sunquist, M. 2004a. Initial measurements with the SUERC accelerator mass spectrometer. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics B 223–224:195–8.Google Scholar
Freeman, S, Bishop, P, Bryant, C, Cook, G, Fallick, A, Harkness, D, Metcalfe, S, Scott, M, Scott, R, Summerfield, M. 2004b. A new environmental science AMS laboratory in Scotland. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics B 223–224:3134.Google Scholar
Hua, Q, Jacobsen, GE, Zoppi, U, Lawson, EM, Williams, AA, Smith, AA, McGann, MJ. 2004. Progress in radiocarbon target preparation at the ANTARES AMS Centre. Radiocarbon 43(2A):275–82.Google Scholar
Kirner, DL, Taylor, RE, Southon, JR. 1995. Reduction in background of microsamples for AMS 14C dating. Radiocarbon 37(2):697–704.Google Scholar
McCrea, JM. 1950. On the isotopic chemistry of carbonates and a paleotemperature scale. Journal of Chemical Physics 18:849–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNichol, AP, Gagnon, AR, Jones, GA, Osborne, EQ. 1992. Illumination of a black box: analysis of gas composition during graphite target preparation. Radiocarbon 34(3):321–9.Google Scholar
Mueller, K, Muzikar, P. 2002. Quantitative study of contamination in AMS. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 197:128–33.Google Scholar
Nadeau, M-J, Kieser, WE, Beukens, RP, Litherland, AE. 1987. Quantum mechanical effects on sputter source isotope fraction. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics B 29:83–6.Google Scholar
Pearson, A, McNichol, AP, Schneider, RJ, von Reden, KF. 1998. Microscale AMS 14C measurement at NOSAMS. Radiocarbon 40(1):61–75.Google Scholar
Pohlmann, JW, Knies, DL, Grabowski, KS, De Truck, TM, Treacy, DJ, Coffin, RB. 2000. Sample distillation/graphitization system for carbon pool analysis by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS). Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics B 172:428–33.Google Scholar
Slota, PJ, Jull, AJT, Linick, TW, Toolin, LJ. 1987. Preparation of small samples for 14C accelerator targets by catalytic reduction of CO. Radiocarbon 29(2):303–6.Google Scholar
Vandeputte, K, Moens, L, Dams, R, van der Plicht, J. 1998. Study of the 14C-contamination potential of C-impurities in CuO and Fe. Radiocarbon 40(1):103–10.Google Scholar
van der Borg, K, Alderliesten, C, de Jong, AFM, van den Brink, A, de Haas, AP, Kersemaekers, HJH, Raaymakers, JEMJ. 1997. Precision and mass fractionation in 14C analysis with AMS. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 123:97–101.Google Scholar
Verkouteren, RM, Klouda, GA, Currie, LA, Donahue, DJ, Linick, TW. 1987. Preparation of microgram samples on iron wool for radiocarbon analysis via accelerator mass spectrometry: a closed system approach. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 29:41–4.Google Scholar
Vogel, JS, Nelson, DE, Southon, JR. 14C background levels in an accelerator mass spectrometry system. Radiocarbon 29(3):323–33.Google Scholar