English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Crystal size distribution analysis is a non-destructive, quantitative method providing insights into the crystallization histories of magmas. Traditional crystal size distribution data collection requires the manual tracing of crystal boundaries within a sample from a digital image. Although this manual method requires minimal equipment to perform, the process is often time-intensive. In this study we investigate the feasibility of using the Quantitative Evaluation of Minerals by SCANing electron microscopy (QEMSCAN) software for semi-automated crystal size distribution analysis. Four Apollo 15 mare basalt thin sections were analysed using both manual and QEMSCAN crystal size distribution data collection methods. In most cases we observe an offset between the crystal size distribution plots produced by QEMSCAN methods compared with the manual data, leading to differences in calculated crystal residence times and nucleation densities. The source of the discrepancy is two-fold: (1) the touching particles processor in the QEMSCAN software is prone to segmenting overlapping elongate crystals into multiple smaller crystals; (2) this segmentation of elongate crystals causes estimates of true 3D crystal habit to vary between QEMSCAN and manual data. The reliability of the QESMCAN data appears to be a function of the crystal texture and average crystal shape, both of which influence the performance of the touching particles processor. Despite these limitations, QEMSCAN is able to produce broadly similar overall trends in crystal size distribution plots to the manual approach, in a considerably shorter time frame. If an accurate crystal size distribution is required to calculate crystal residence time or nucleation density, we recommend that QEMSCAN should only be used after careful consideration of the suitability of the sample texture and average crystal shape.

QEMSCAN as a Method of Semi-Automated Crystal Size Distribution Analysis: Insights from Apollo 15 Mare Basalts