A guide for proper utilisation of stable isotope reference materials
Open accessAbstract
Many scientific publications about stable isotope ratios suffer from flawed practices regarding calibration and normalisation of raw δ values in conjunction with prescribed δ values of reference materials. Violations of the identical treatment principle with regards to samples and standards (i.e. reference materials) and lack of adherence to SI-mandated and IUPAC-recommended nomenclature exacerbate the widespread problem of lackadaisical analytical practice and reporting. Science is supposed to strive for exactness, whereas ambiguity and jargon confound interdisciplinary communication. This contribution aims to expose typical misconceptions and avoidable errors and offers guidance toward the reproducible generation of isotope data, isotopic scale normalisation, and proper data reporting. We offer a comprehensive overview of sources of light stable isotope reference materials to best match sample matrices encountered by stable isotope practitioners with chemically similar reference materials.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Analytical data can be normalised to the VPDB scale using a two-point calibration procedure that is traceable via local measurement of primary calcite reference materials.
“Furthermore, analytical data can be normalised to the Vienna Pee Dee Belemnite (VPDB) scale using a two‐point calibration procedure that is traceable via local measurement of primary calcite reference materials. 31 , 36”
From Improving the routine analysis of siderite for δ <sup>13</sup> C and δ <sup>18</sup> O in environmental change research (2023) · cites this paper as [36]
The use of globally available, matrix‐specific reference materials to improve the reproducibility of isotope data is well established.
“The use of globally available, matrix‐specific reference materials to improve the reproducibility of isotope data is well established. 36 , 60”
From Improving the routine analysis of siderite for δ <sup>13</sup> C and δ <sup>18</sup> O in environmental change research (2023) · cites this paper as [36]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 27 · Cited by 77
- Authors
- Meier-Augenstein, W., & Schimmelmann, A.
- Affiliations
- School of Pharmacy and Life Sciences, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, UK
- Indiana University Bloomington (US)
- Venue
- Isotopes in Environmental and Health Studies
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-11-08
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 113-128
- ISSN
- 1025-6016 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-2639
- OpenAlex
- W2900167163
- Cited by
- 77
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 10
- FWCI
- 7.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- cc-by-nc
- Locations
- Isotopes in Environmental and Health Studies (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- IUScholarWorks Open (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
- Open Access Institutional Repository at Robert Gordon University (Robert Gordon University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Isotope Analysis in Ecology
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Scientific Measurement and Uncertainty Evaluation
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geochemistry and Petrology › Groundwater and Isotope Geochemistry
- Keywords
- isotope ratio calibration, IUPAC nomenclature, reproducibility, analytic practice
- MeSH terms
- Calibration, Isotopes, Reference Standards, Reference Values, Mass Spectrometry, Guidelines as Topic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
