Research ArticleGEOLOGY

Evaporative fractionation of zinc during the first nuclear detonation

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science Advances  08 Feb 2017:
Vol. 3, no. 2, e1602668
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1602668
  • Fig. 1 Incompatible trace element abundances in trinitite glasses, ordered according to TC50, double-normalized over the least-melted trinitite sample (T3) and strontium.

    TC50 are from a study by Lodders (4), with shaded boundaries shown for elements with TC50 of >1600, >800, and <800 K.

  • Fig. 2 δ66Zn versus δ68Zn for trinitite samples and for their associated residues and leachates or etchates.

    Solid line illustrates the predicted mass-dependent fractionation curve of 2. Shaded bars define the terrestrial Zn isotope composition from a study by Chen et al. (21). R, residues; L, leachates or etchates.

  • Fig. 3 Relationship of δ66Zn and Zn abundance in trinitite glasses with distance from the Gadget nuclear device at the Trinity test site.

    Relationships of the samples with distance define δ66Zn variation of −0.0017x + 0.7181 with an R2 of 0.8 (stippled line).

  • Fig. 4 Zn abundance versus δ66Zn for trinitite glasses versus tektites and mare basalts [from studies by Paniello et al. (8), Kato et al. (9), and Moynier et al. (25)].

    Rayleigh distillation curves are shown for different α fractionation factors (1, 0.9998, 0.999, and 0.998) for arkosic sand at the Trinity test site with 30 μg g−1 Zn. Mare basalts fall within the same α curves (0.9998 to 0.999) as trinitite, implying similar, or lower, starting Zn abundances. Also shown is the Rayleigh distillation curve assuming a chondritic abundance of Zn (300 μg g−1), which passes through tektites at an α of 0.9995, illustrating that these isotopically fractionated materials likely derived from a higher initial Zn abundance.

Supplementary Materials

  • Supplementary material for this article is available at http://advances.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/3/2/e1602668/DC1

    Geological setting, historical background, bomb detonation, and samples

    Comparison between trinitite, tektite, and fulgurite

    Xenon isotope results

    Trace element abundance data

    fig. S1. Map of the Trinity test site.

    fig. S2. Geology of trinitite.

    fig. S3. Images of trinitite samples used in this study.

    fig. S4. Upper continental crust–normalized incompatible trace element patterns for trinitite.

    fig. S5. Incompatible trace element abundances in trinitite plotted as a function of condensation temperature.

    table S1. Zinc abundance and isotopic compositions of trinitite.

    table S2. Xenon isotopic compositions of trinitite.

    table S3. Trace element abundance data for trinitite samples.

    table S4. Mineralogy of trinitite.

    table S5. Comparison of trinitite, tektite, and fulgurite formation conditions.

    References (3039)

  • Supplementary Materials

    This PDF file includes:

    • Geological setting, historical background, bomb detonation, and samples
    • Comparison between trinitite, tektite, and fulgurite
    • Xenon isotope results
    • Trace element abundance data
    • fig. S1. Map of the Trinity test site.
    • fig. S2. Geology of trinitite.
    • fig. S3. Images of trinitite samples used in this study.
    • fig. S4. Upper continental crust–normalized incompatible trace element patterns for trinitite.
    • fig. S5. Incompatible trace element abundances in trinitite plotted as a function of condensation temperature.
    • table S1. Zinc abundance and isotopic compositions of trinitite.
    • table S2. Xenon isotopic compositions of trinitite.
    • table S3. Trace element abundance data for trinitite samples.
    • table S4. Mineralogy of trinitite.
    • table S5. Comparison of trinitite, tektite, and fulgurite formation conditions.
    • References (30–39)

    Download PDF

    Files in this Data Supplement:

Stay Connected to Science Advances

Navigate This Article