Skip to main content
Journal of Analytical Science and Technology
Journal of Analytical Science and Technology Cover Image

Table 4 Literature data of Δ’17O and recalucalted Δ’17O relative to different assigned reference lines

From: Correction to: Two-point normalization for reducing interlaboratory discrepancies in δ17O, δ18O, and Δ′17O of reference silicates

Sample n Literature data Recalculated Δ’17Oa References  
Δ’17O SD SEM λRL γRL λRL = 0.5305 λRL = 0.528 λRL = 0.5278 λRL = 0.5273  
(‰) (1σ) (1σ) γRL = 0 γRL = 0 γRL = −0.040 γRL = −0.099  
UWG2 garnet 38 −0.022 – 0.027 0.52 – −0.076 −0.062 − 0.021 0.041 Franchi et al. (1999)  
  94 0.02 – – 0.5263 – −0.004 0.010 0.051 0.113 Kusakabe and Matsuhisa (2008)  
  20 0.03 – – 0.5248 – − 0.051 − 0.037 0.004 0.065 Ahn et al. (2012)  
  17 −0.008 0.029 – 0.5270 −0.07 − 0.095 − 0.081 −0.039 0.022 Tanaka and Nakamura (2013)  
  5 −0.102 0.007 0.003 0.5305 – −0.113 −0.098 − 0.057 0.005 Pack and Herwartz (2014)  
  16 −0.021 0.024 0.006 0.5280 – −0.036 − 0.022 0.019 0.081 Young et al., (2014)  
  50 0.013 0.027 0.003 0.52 – − 0.047 −0.033 0.008 0.070 Ali et al. (2016)  
  20 −0.017 0.010 0.002 0.5247 – −0.050 − 0.036 0.005 0.067 Starkey et al. (2016)  
  2 −0.004 0.003 0.002 0.528 – −0.008 0.007 0.049 0.111 Young et al. (2016)  
  16 0.047 0.005 – 0.5272 0.282 −0.060 − 0.046 − 0.005 0.057 Miller et al. (2020)b  
  68 0.049 0.008 – 0.5273 −0.089 − 0.060 − 0.046 − 0.005 0.057 Miller et al. (2020)c  
  9 −0.071 0.005 – 0.528 – −0.085 −0.071 − 0.030 0.032 Wostbrock et al. (2020)  
  7 −0.062 0.001 – 0.528 – −0.077 −0.063 − 0.021 0.040 Ghoshmaulik et al. (2020)  
  35 − 0.007 0.011 – 0.528 −0.040 −0.061 − 0.046 −0.007 0.057 This study  
NBS28 qurartz 28 0.014 – 0.025 0.52 – −0.072 − 0.049 − 0.007 0.056 Franchi et al. (1999)  
  20 0.01 – – 0.5263 – −0.025 − 0.003 0.039 0.102 Kusakabe and Matsuhisa (2008)  
  13 0.04 – – 0.5248 – −0.080 − 0.059 − 0.017 0.046 Ahn et al. (2012)  
  18 0.007 0.024 – 0.5270 −0.07 − 0.100 − 0.076 − 0.034 0.030 Tanaka and Nakamura (2013)  
  13 −0.104 0.008 0.002 0.5305 – −0.100 − 0.076 − 0.034 0.030 Pack and Herwartz (2014)  
  20 0.035 0.025 0.006 0.52 – − 0.062 −0.039 0.003 0.066 Ali et al. (2016)  
  9 0.012 0.012 0.004 0.5247 – − 0.039 − 0.016 0.026 0.090 Starkey et al. (2016)  
  5 0.072 0.007 – 0.5272 0.282 −0.048 − 0.025 0.017 0.081 Miller et al. (2020)b  
  3 0.060 0.004 – 0.5273 −0.089 − 0.064 − 0.040 0.002 0.065 Miller et al. (2020)c  
  13 −0.059 0.004 – 0.528 – −0.083 −0.059 − 0.017 0.047 Wostbrock et al. (2020)  
  9 −0.059 0.006 – 0.528 – −0.083 −0.059 − 0.017 0.047 Ghoshmaulik et al. (2020)  
  12 0.006 0.009 – 0.528 −0.040 −0.058 − 0.035 0.006 0.071 This study  
San Carlos olivine 2 0.007 – 0.019 0.52 – −0.042 − 0.029 0.012 0.073 Franchi et al. (1999)  
  7 0.12 – – 0.5263 – 0.090 0.103 0.144 0.205 Kusakabe and Matsuhisa (2008)  
  21 0.01 – – 0.5248 – −0.079 − 0.066 − 0.025 0.036 Ahn et al. (2012)  
  20 −0.006 – – 0.5270 − 0.07 − 0.097 − 0.084 − 0.043 0.019 Tanaka and Nakamura (2013)  
  35 −0.103 0.008 0.001 0.5305 – −0.107 − 0.094 − 0.053 0.009 Pack and Herwartz (2014)  
  24 −0.004 0.028 0.006 0.528 – −0.017 −0.004 0.037 0.099 Young et al. (2014)  
  30 −0.036 0.007 0.001 0.528 – −0.054 − 0.041 0.000 0.061 Pack et al. (2016)d  
  5 −0.039 0.007 0.003 0.528 – −0.051 − 0.038 0.003 0.065 Pack et al. (2016)e  
  5 0.055 0.084 0.038 0.52 – 0.000 0.013 0.054 0.116 Ali et al. (2016)  
  19 −0.012 0.010* 0.002* 0.5247 – −0.040 − 0.028 0.013 0.075 Starkey et al. (2016)f  
  9 −0.014 0.010* 0.003* 0.5247 – −0.044 − 0.031 0.010 0.071 Starkey et al. (2016)g  
  17 0.000 0.005 0.001 0.528 – −0.013 0.000 0.041 0.102 Young et al. (2016)  
  12 −0.054 0.008 – 0.528 – −0.069 − 0.055 − 0.014 0.048 Sharp et al. (2016)  
  9 0.054 0.008 – 0.5272 0.282 −0.050 −0.039 0.002 0.064 Miller et al. (2020)b, f  
  33 0.056 0.009 – 0.5273 −0.089 − 0.051 − 0.038 0.003 0.064 Miller et al. (2020)c, g  
  18 −0.058 0.005 – 0.528 – −0.071 −0.058 − 0.017 0.045 Wostbrock et al. (2020)  
  8 −0.045 0.002 – 0.528 – −0.058 −0.045 − 0.004 0.058 Ghoshmaulik et al. (2020)  
  9 0.008 0.011 – 0.5278 −0.040 − 0.045 − 0.031 0.008 0.071 This study  
  1. a Recalculated Δ’17O values are from published δ-values relative to VSMOW and four different reference line as mentioned in the text
  2. b At Open University
  3. c At Georg-August-Universitiät Göttingen
  4. d At Geoscience Center (GZG), University of Göttingen
  5. e At Institute for Study of the Earth’s Interior (ISEI), Okayama University
  6. f San Carlos olivine type 1
  7. g San Carlos olivine type 2
  8. *Errors are given as 2σ standard deviation or standard error of the mean
  9. SD standard deviation; SEM = standard error of the mean
Back to article page
\