Home Physical Sciences Calibration of Fe XANES for high-precision determination of Fe oxidation state in glasses: Comparison of new and existing results obtained at different synchrotron radiation sources
Article Publicly Available

Calibration of Fe XANES for high-precision determination of Fe oxidation state in glasses: Comparison of new and existing results obtained at different synchrotron radiation sources

  • A. Fiege , P. Ruprecht , A.C. Simon , A.S. Bell , J. Göttlicher , M. Newville , T. Lanzirotti and G. Moore
Published/Copyright: April 3, 2017
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Figure 3 of this article was published without the key to the symbols used. We have the corrected figure below.

Figure 3. (a–d) Calibration trends for the determination of the Fe oxidation state in glasses based on the centroid energy of the Fe pre-edge peak. (a) Only results from this study. The felsic glasses cover a range of compositions from dacitic andesite to rhyolite. The red crosses are analyses from another session (the outlier marked in Fig. 1 is excluded). The gray lines provide an example for the determined uncertainties for the individual equations (here, trends are plotted for Eq. 1). (b) Reference glass data from three previous studies and from this study. The plotted data set covers glass compositions ranging from felsic to mafic and Fe XANES spectra were collected at four different synchrotron radiation sources (APS, ANKA, ESRF, DESY). The results of Berry et al. (2003) and Cottrell et al. (2009) are excluded (see text for details). The gray lines reflect trends for ±6% Fe3+/ΣFe. At least 64% of the compiled data with <60% Fe3+/ΣFe are covered by this range. Here, the 64% are a minimum value since the individual uncertainties are not considered. Notice that Fe3+/ΣFe ratios of ≥60% in magmas are rare (Carmichael 1991). (c) Comparison of results from Fe XANES analyses on felsic glasses performed at different synchrotron radiation sources (APS, ANKA, ESRF, NSLS). (d) Comparison of results from Fe XANES analyses on mafic glasses performed at different beamlines at different synchrotron radiation sources (13-ID-E at APS, SUL-X at ANKA, ID26 at ESRF, X26A at NSLS, L at DESY, 20B at KEK). Notes: * The centroid energies provided in the literature were corrected (corr.) to match our energy calibration (i.e., 7110.75 eV for the first derivative peak of a XANES spectrum collected on Fe metal foil). The regressions were predicted using KaleidaGraph and the displayed trends were labeled according to the numbering of the equations given in the text. # A Si(111) four-crystal monochromator was used by Wilke et al. (2005), which should have a similar energy resolution as most Si(311) double crystal setups. To distinguish trends/symbols see online color version.
Figure 3.

(a–d) Calibration trends for the determination of the Fe oxidation state in glasses based on the centroid energy of the Fe pre-edge peak. (a) Only results from this study. The felsic glasses cover a range of compositions from dacitic andesite to rhyolite. The red crosses are analyses from another session (the outlier marked in Fig. 1 is excluded). The gray lines provide an example for the determined uncertainties for the individual equations (here, trends are plotted for Eq. 1). (b) Reference glass data from three previous studies and from this study. The plotted data set covers glass compositions ranging from felsic to mafic and Fe XANES spectra were collected at four different synchrotron radiation sources (APS, ANKA, ESRF, DESY). The results of Berry et al. (2003) and Cottrell et al. (2009) are excluded (see text for details). The gray lines reflect trends for ±6% Fe3+/ΣFe. At least 64% of the compiled data with <60% Fe3+/ΣFe are covered by this range. Here, the 64% are a minimum value since the individual uncertainties are not considered. Notice that Fe3+/ΣFe ratios of ≥60% in magmas are rare (Carmichael 1991). (c) Comparison of results from Fe XANES analyses on felsic glasses performed at different synchrotron radiation sources (APS, ANKA, ESRF, NSLS). (d) Comparison of results from Fe XANES analyses on mafic glasses performed at different beamlines at different synchrotron radiation sources (13-ID-E at APS, SUL-X at ANKA, ID26 at ESRF, X26A at NSLS, L at DESY, 20B at KEK). Notes: * The centroid energies provided in the literature were corrected (corr.) to match our energy calibration (i.e., 7110.75 eV for the first derivative peak of a XANES spectrum collected on Fe metal foil). The regressions were predicted using KaleidaGraph and the displayed trends were labeled according to the numbering of the equations given in the text. # A Si(111) four-crystal monochromator was used by Wilke et al. (2005), which should have a similar energy resolution as most Si(311) double crystal setups. To distinguish trends/symbols see online color version.


(February, vol. 102, p. 369–380, 2017. Article http://dx.doi.org/10.2138/am-2017-5822. Erratum https://doi.org/10.2138/am-2017-E102410.)


Published Online: 2017-4-3
Published in Print: 2017-4-1

© 2017 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Review: Minerals in the Human Body
  2. Mineral precipitation and dissolution in the kidney
  3. Special Collection: Nanominerals and Mineral Nanoparticles
  4. Luogufengite: A new nano-mineral of Fe2O3 polymorph with giant coercive field
  5. Special Collection: Apatite: A Common Mineral, Uncommonly Versatile
  6. Column anion arrangements in chemically zoned ternary chlorapatite and fluorapatite from Kurokura, Japan
  7. Special Collection: Apatite: A Common Mineral, Uncommonly Versatile
  8. Magmatic graphite inclusions in Mn-Fe-rich fluorapatite of perphosphorus granites (the Belvís pluton, Variscan Iberian Belt)
  9. Special Collection: Apatite: A Common Mineral, Uncommonly Versatile
  10. Barometric constraints based on apatite inclusions in garnet
  11. Special collection: Olivine
  12. A comparison of olivine-melt thermometers based on DMg and DNi: The effects of melt composition, temperature, and pressure with applications to MORBs and hydrous arc basalts
  13. Special collection: Dynamics of magmatic processes
  14. Water transfer during magma mixing events: Insights into crystal mush rejuvenation and melt extraction processes
  15. Special collection: Rates and depths of magma ascent on earth
  16. A new clinopyroxene-liquid barometer, and implications for magma storage pressures under Icelandic rift zones
  17. The S content of silicate melts at sulfide saturation: New experiments and a model incorporating the effects of sulfide composition
  18. Bond valence and bond energy
  19. Fluvial transport of impact evidence from cratonic interior to passive margin: Vredefort-derived shocked zircon on the Atlantic coast of South Africa
  20. Iron partitioning in natural lower-mantle minerals: Toward a chemically heterogeneous lower mantle
  21. Identifying biogenic silica: Mudrock micro-fabric explored through charge contrast imaging
  22. Compressibility and high-pressure structural behavior of Mg2Fe2O5
  23. Thermo-elastic behavior of grossular garnet at high pressures and temperatures
  24. Experimental constraints on the stability of baddeleyite and zircon in carbonate- and silicate-carbonate melts
  25. Polarized FTIR spectroscopic examination on hydroxylation in the minerals of the wolframite group, (Fe,Mn,Mg)[W,(Nb,Ta)][O,(OH)]4
  26. Tourmaline-rich features in the Heemskirk and Pieman Heads granites from western Tasmania, Australia: Characteristics, origins, and implications for tin mineralization
  27. Ca L2,3-edge near edge X-ray absorption fine structure of tricalcium aluminate, gypsum, and calcium (sulfo)aluminate hydrates
  28. Fluorwavellite, Al3(PO4)2(OH)2F·5H2O, the fluorine analog of wavellite
  29. New Mineral Names
  30. Book Review
  31. Book Review: Geochemical Rate Models: An Introduction to Geochemical Kinetics
  32. Book Review
  33. Book Review: Oxygen: A Four Billion Year History
  34. Erratum
  35. Calibration of Fe XANES for high-precision determination of Fe oxidation state in glasses: Comparison of new and existing results obtained at different synchrotron radiation sources
Downloaded on 2.3.2026 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.2138/am-2017-E102410/html
Scroll to top button