  A logic satisfies the interpolation property provided that whenever a formula
{\Delta} is a consequence of another formula {\Gamma}, then this is witnessed
by a formula {\Theta} which only refers to the language common to {\Gamma} and
{\Delta}. That is, the relational (and functional) symbols occurring in
{\Theta} occur in both {\Gamma} and {\Delta}, {\Gamma} has {\Theta} as a
consequence, and {\Theta} has {\Delta} as a consequence. Both classical and
intuitionistic predicate logic have the interpolation property, but it is a
long open problem which intermediate predicate logics enjoy it. In 2013 Mints,
Olkhovikov, and Urquhart showed that constant domain intuitionistic logic does
not have the interpolation property, while leaving open whether predicate
G\"odel logic does. In this short note, we show that their counterexample for
constant domain intuitionistic logic does admit an interpolant in predicate
G\"odel logic. While this has no impact on settling the question for predicate
G\"odel logic, it lends some credence to a common belief that it does satisfy
interpolation. Also, our method is based on an analysis of the semantic tools
of Olkhovikov and it is our hope that this might eventually be useful in
settling this question.
