used in our analysis. @gonzalez98 adopt the @grevesse98 solar abundance and a different $gf$ value so we adjust their Zr abundances by +0.06 dex. @tomkin99 adopt the @grevesse98 solar abundance and a different $gf$ value so we adjust their Zr abundances by +0.11 dex. These adjustments are substantial. When we compare the ratio \[Rb/Zr\], we also consider how the comparison would fare had we not made these abundance corrections. To assess the validity of these adjustments, we measured the Zr abundance for Arcturus and found \[Zr/H\] = $-$0.66. @smith00 measured \[Zr/H\] = $-$0.96, @gonzalez98 found $-$1.18, and @tomkin99 found $-$1.00. Therefore, applying the abundance corrections based on the $gf$ values and solar abundances ensures that the Zr abundances are on the @smith00 scale, e.g., for Arcturus we find $-$0.96 (this study), $-$1.12 (@gonzalez98), $-$0.89 (@tomkin99), and $-$0.96 (@smith00). Interestingly, if we had used the same solar abundance as @smith00, our \[Zr/Fe\] abundances in Y05 would have been closer to the \[Y/Fe\] values and for M 13 we would have found \[Y/Fe\] $\simeq$ \[Zr/Fe\]. In Figure \[fig:zr\], we plot \[Zr/Fe\] versus \[Fe/H\] with the abundances shifted to the @smith00 scale. At the metallicity of NGC 6752 and M 13, the field 