@article{gledocs_11858_8441, author = {Wudarska, Alicja and Słaby, Ewa and Wiedenbeck, Michael and Barnes, Jaime D. and Bonifacie, Magali and Sturchio, Neil C. and Bardoux, Gérard and Couffignal, Frédéric and Glodny, Johannes and Heraty, Linnea and John, Timm and Kusebauch, Christof and Mayanna, Sathish and Wilke, Franziska D. H. and Deput, Ewa}, title = {Inter‐laboratory Characterisation of Apatite Reference Materials for Chlorine Isotope Analysis}, year = {2020-12-25}, abstract = {Here we report on a set of six apatite reference materials (chlorapatites MGMH#133648, TUBAF#38 and fluorapatites MGMH#128441A, TUBAF#37, 40, 50) which we have characterised for their chlorine isotope ratios; these RMs span a range of Cl mass fractions within the apatite Ca10(PO4)6(F,Cl,OH)2 solid solution series. Numerous apatite specimens, obtained from mineralogical collections, were initially screened for 37Cl/35Cl homogeneity using SIMS followed by δ37Cl characterisation by gas source mass spectrometry using both dual‐inlet and continuous‐flow modes. We also report major and key trace element compositions as determined by EPMA. The repeatability of our SIMS results was better than ± 0.10% (1s) for the five samples with > 0.5% m/m Cl and ± 0.19% (1s) for the low Cl abundance material (0.27% m/m). We also observed a small, but significant crystal orientation effect of 0.38% between the mean 37Cl/35Cl ratios measured on three oriented apatite fragments. Furthermore, the results of GS‐IRMS analyses show small but systematic offset of δ37ClSMOC values between the three laboratories. Nonetheless, all studied samples have comparable chlorine isotope compositions, with mean 103δ37ClSMOC values between +0.09 and +0.42 and in all cases with 1s ≤ ± 0.25.}, note = { \url {http://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gldocs-11858/8441}}, }