Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 238

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Iron isotope fractionation during microbial reduction of iron: The importance of adsorption

Icopini, G.A., Anbar, A.D., Ruebush, S.S., Tien, M., Brantley, S.L.·2004·Geology

Abstract

Research Article| March 01, 2004 Iron isotope fractionation during microbial reduction of iron: The importance of adsorption G.A. Icopini; G.A. Icopini 1Department of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar A.D. Anbar; A.D. Anbar 2Department of Earth and Environmental Science and Department of Chemistry, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627, USA Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar S.S. Ruebush; S.S. Ruebush 3 Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar M. Tien; M. Tien 3 Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar S.L. Brantley S.L. Brantley 4Department of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Author and Article Information G.A. Icopini 1Department of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA A.D. Anbar 2Department of Earth and Environmental Science and Department of Chemistry, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627, USA S.S. Ruebush 3 Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA M. Tien 3 Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA S.L. Brantley 4Department of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA Publisher: Geological Society of America Received: 05 Sep 2003 Revision Received: 13 Nov 2003 Accepted: 18 Nov 2003 First Online: 09 Mar 2017 Online ISSN: 1943-2682 Print ISSN: 0091-7613 Geological Society of America Geology (2004) 32 (3): 205–208. https://doi.org/10.1130/G20184.1 Article history Received: 05 Sep 2003 Revision Received: 13 Nov 2003 Accepted: 18 Nov 2003 First Online: 09 Mar 2017 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Search Site Citation G.A. Icopini, A.D. Anbar, S.S. Ruebush, M. Tien, S.L. Brantley; Iron isotope fractionation during microbial reduction of iron: The importance of adsorption. Geology 2004;; 32 (3): 205–208. doi: https://doi.org/10.1130/G20184.1 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Refmanager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentBy SocietyGeology Search Advanced Search Abstract In experiments investigating the causes of Fe isotope fractionation, the δ56/54Fe value of Fe(II) remaining in solution (Fe(II)(aq)) after reduction of Fe(III) (goethite) by Shewanella putrefaciens is ∼−1.2‰ relative to the goethite, in agreement with previous research. The addition of an electron shuttle did not affect fractionation, suggesting that Fe isotope fractionation may not be related to the kinetics of the electron transfer. Furthermore, in abiotic, anaerobic FeCl2(aq) experiments in which approximately one-third of Fe(II)(aq) is lost from solution due to adsorption of Fe(II) onto goethite, the δ56/54Fe value of Fe(II)(aq) remaining in solution is shifted by −0.8‰ relative to FeCl2. This finding demonstrates that anaerobic nonbiological interaction between Fe(II) and goethite can generate significant Fe isotope fractionation. Acid extraction of sorbed Fe(II) from goethite in experiments reveals that heavy Fe preferentially sorbs to goethite. Simple mass-balance modeling indicates that the isotopic composition of the sorbed Fe(II) pool is ∼+1.5‰ to +2.5‰ heavier than Fe in the goethite [∼2.7‰–3.7‰ heavier than aqueous Fe(II)]. Mass balance is also consistent with a pool of heavy Fe that is not released to solution during acid extraction. You do not have access to this content, please speak to your institutional administrator if you feel you should have access.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1130/g20184.1

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 238

Metadata

Authors
Icopini, G. A., Anbar, A. D., Ruebush, S. S., Tien, M., & Brantley, S. L.
Venue
Geology
Published
2004
Volume
32
Issue
3
Pages
205
ISSN
0091-7613 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1987716298
Cited by
238
References
1
FWCI
12.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Iron isotope fractionation during microbial reduction of iron: The importance of adsorption. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1130/g20184.1
The paper
Icopini, G. A., Anbar, A. D., Ruebush, S. S., Tien, M., & Brantley, S. L. (2004). Iron isotope fractionation during microbial reduction of iron: The importance of adsorption. Geology. https://doi.org/10.1130/g20184.1

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.