Questions related to Radiocarbon Dating
Does anyone have any experience measuring phytolith concentrations in humid soils? In particular, I'm especially interested in phytolith concentrations (and radiocarbon dating of phytolith occluded carbon) in E soil horizons formed in Late Pleistocene loess.
I have some lake sediment cores which I am planning to date using AMS radiocarbon dating and tephrochronology. Are there any recommended procedures for sampling lake sediment cores to remove terrestrial plant remains and things such as wood, charcoal, bone, etc, for radiocarbon dating?
I have come across some methods that mention placing the sediment sample in water, sieving the samples and then picking out the target items using fine forceps or a paint brush.
Any recommended papers or procedures would be welcome.
If you had access to large sediments of guano and wanted to attempt at ageing the material. Without knowing about the physical properties of the guano, what would be your best bet to get some age related or biologically relevant metric out of the cores. Metal Analysis? radio isotopes? Pollen microscopy? Genetic?
I am working in the lake sediment system and I have both radiocarbon and osl ages. In order to build a full chronology of the lake is Bayesian age depth model a good option? If not could you please suggest me the alternatives? Thanking in advance.
I need to find the records for a radiocarbon analysis done in the 1970s. I have found out that the lab was Teledyne Isotopes, in Germany (lab code I). Radiocarbon's list on lab codes says that the Lab is no longer operational. I did find in the Radiocarbon journal several reports of dates from Teledyne but none are the ones I am looking for. Any suggestions? The samples I need info on are I-9248, I-9249 and I-9250. The author who originally published the dates does not report the radiocarbon age, just a calendar date and the lab code, and he has no additional information (I spoke to him already).
If so, are there any protocols set up for this process or papers outlining experiments that have used this process in the southeastern United States?
A. DARWINSM, three age system and genetics
B. SYMBOLYSM, post modernism and radiocarbon dating.
C. CULTURE history, processual and post processual explanation.
D. NATURAL and cultural transformation processes.
I,m looking forward to estimate the paleo-reservoir age of the surface ocean using the radiocarbon dating method and chronostratigraphy tool. For I that I need dated tephra from Indian Ocean for the last 50,000 Years. My sediment core lies in the Central Equatorial Indian Ocean and Southern Bay of Bengal.
I am looking for a book
"Radiocarbon dating practices at ANU" by Gupta and Polach, published in 1985.
Can anyone please provide the link or source from where I can get this book?
I have had some weird c14 results on bone from a site that is partially flooded on a seasonal basis. There are a nuclear power plant and an oil refinery further down in the same estuary. Could some potential water contamination have altered the carbon content of the archaeological samples?
When we understand dating methods as being based on models (i.e. representations of some portions of reality), we shall ask ourselves whether those models are linear deterministic, non-linear deterministic, stochastic, or hybrid. I am under the impression that often archaeologists expect dating methods to behave in a linear deterministic way, while they most often behave stochastically or in a hybrid way. It looks like this misconception may be particularly problematic when combinig the results of different dating methods (scientific, archaeological, historical) to obtain a general chronological framework for a site or a period. What do you think? Which examples would you provide to illustrate the deterministic, stochastic and/or hybrid models used in archaeological chronometry?
I want to oxidise pollen samples in preparation for radiocarbon dating. I need to know the concentration of the bleach expressed as a %. In the end, I need 1-3% concentration. It may turn out that the bleach is already at this concentration or that I need to dilute it.
This is a very controversial topic. Which of the following do you feel has been the most effective in dating rock art for you. Superimposition, seriation, subject matter, radiocarbon dating, associated cultural materials with single component status, desert varnish portable quantitative XRF dating.
I observed a weak shoulder on a peak on IR spectrum of a soil under deciduous trees. With spectrum treatment, it's a clear signal at 1310 cm-1. It could be an artefact, but it appears only in the most calcareous soils, and only under deciduous trees (in which pedonculate oaks and beeches), not under resinous, so I thought of a specific molecule these trees might emit to deal with limestone.
Does anyone (maybe botanists) have an idea about this ?
The method of Springer-Lilje (1988) is a probabilistic extinction-date determination with the following equation for a confidence interval of 95%:
Dext = Dmin - ([In(0.05)] / - [(N - 1) / Dmax - Dmin])
where Dext is the extinction date, Dmin the geologically youngest date, Dmax is the geologically oldest date and N is the number of datings.
However, typically, ASR and EER dates are provided as +/- 20% for the 95% confidence range. Do I have to use for Dmin the youngest date minus 20% (and for Dmax the oldest date plus 20%), OR I ignore this 20%?
Has anyone references or data on the archaeology, stratigraphy, geoarchaeology, soil micromorphology etc. of bone-fuelled hearths \ combustion features, esp. in Paleolithic caves or rock-shelters, or reference material from experimental work? Thanks in advance, Diego E. Angelucci
Be-isotopic content in soils has been used to constrain soil age, to quantify erosion rates, to estimate rates of soil transport and other processes over long time scales (1000 - 10000000 years). Is there any results in estimating parameters of Holocene burried soil (in time between 100 - 1000 years ) with using Be-isotopic method ?
So I've been reading up on articles on how to carbon-date samples. The common problem seems to be the contamination of non carbonated material and how to remove materials that would affect the result of the carbon-dating procedure. I'm going to date coral skeletal material, however I will need 20 g of samples the is pre-washed and has already received pre-treatment before dating. ( I will not be using the AMS method for carbon-dating)
These are the main issues I've realized so far:
1. Will multi-species samples be good for carbon-dating or will it affect the result too hard and not produce good results? (multi-species samples means that from the same depth I will add multiple fragments from different species and treat them together as one sample)
2. I will have to crush the sample to a specific grain size. This is to get a homogenized sample and to be able to remove trapped sediment particles that would affect the dating result. Which size fraction would be good to use? Now we are getting combined to the third issue.
3. How should I seperate the CaCO3 material from the rest after I crushed it to a specific size?3 The easiest way so far what I've understood would be to seperate them on their density dependant scale. Two articles (Susanne Heier-Nielsen et al. 1995 & Feyling-Hanssen, R. W. et al. 1971) used CCl4 to "concentrate" their Foraminifera shells. They do not however explain how the material is concentrated. I do however assume that the shells containing mainly CaCO3 material float up and were collected from the surface layer and then washed with DIW? Could the same chemical possibly be used on crushed coral material to float the CaCO3 material from sediment residue?
4. As my coral samples are not too big and are very restricted to old fragment, an acid etching would remove a lot of sample weight. Is this step extremely crucial or can I possibly skip it to save my sample size?
5. Should I treat the samples with H2O2 before or after crushing the material, and before or after the CCl4 treatment to remove organic carbon from the sample?
Thank you all for your answers in advance!
Radiocarbon Dating of Shells and Foraminifera from the Skagen Core, Denmark: Evidence of Reworking
Susanne Heier-Nielsen, Keld Conradsen, Jan Heinemeier, K. L. Knudsen, H. L. Nielsen, Niels Rud and Á. E. Sveinbjörnsdóttir
Radiocarbon / Volume 37 / Issue 02 / January 1995, pp 119 - 130
FEYLING-HANSSEN, R. W-, JØRGENSEN, J. A., KNUDSEN, K. L. & ANDERSEN,
A.-L. L.: Late Quaternary Foraminifera from Vendsyssel,
Denmark and Sandnes, Norway. Bull. geol. Soc. Denmark, vol. 21,
pp. 67-317. Copenhagen, December, 15th, 1971.
That is, to find out not the antiquity of the remains, but the antiquity of cremation. If possible indicate the bibliographic references. Thank you!
Beginner learners on Bomb-spike method to determine C14 of Nonstructual hydrates of plants tissues. I have read papers from two research teams: Jena's (Muhr et al., 2016) and Harvards‘s (Richardson et al., 2015).
While still have questions about:
(1) If any baseline exists for C14 determination? Maple syrup used by Muhr (2016) may be material have enough sugars(and more C14). But I focus more about phloem sap of one birch species, I am not sure the sugar(C14) content and abundance is enough for determine.
(2) As you experts know, is this bomb-spike method acceptable or reasonable to study tree’s respond to severe stress like drought at the time scale of short year. I want to detect if trees growing in bad condition use more old NSCs to keep survival.
Papers I read,
Muhr, J., et al. (2016). "How fresh is maple syrup? Sugar maple trees mobilize carbon stored several years previously during early springtime sap-ascent." New Phytol 209(4): 1410-1416.
Richardson, A. D., et al. (2015). "Distribution and mixing of old and new nonstructural carbon in two temperate trees." New Phytologist 206(2): 590-597.
DATING using vitrinite reflectance and fission tracks for coal and
that studies have been conducted on paleogeometria? in basins where coal is using vitrinite reflectance?
Some plant species living in particularly strong environmental stress show different level of 13C absorption as opposed to individuals from the same species living in normal conditions. May this have a reflection also on 14C content even beyond standard laboratory isotopic fractionation correction?
I've carbon-dated a number of micro charcoal samples collected from soil in hopes of determining when the most recent fire event occurred.
However, upon receiving the result back from the lab, they explained that a definitive date for the charcoal could not be determined because of the Suess Effect. In other words, the charcoal was dated between 1650-1950 and due to the highly variable atmospheric concentrations of C13/C14 (because of combustion of fossil fuels), the age could not be determined beyond + or - ca. 150 years.
Is it possible to correct for the suess effect somehow to narrow the margin of error for date estimates?
I would be interested in the specifics. What did you do and when? How did your effort turn out? Were there independent means of cross checking your derived dates? What did it cost? Was it a destructive technique? Did the analyst have to visit the site where you acquired the rock art or artifacts? Has anyone tried to use a dating technique for desert varnish on ancient flaked stone artifacts? I am only aware of one published study in Argentina. That one seemed interesting and rather helpful.
Using the Combine function of dates in Oxcal software, there is some cases with agreements greater than 100%, and I'm not sure how to interpret that.
My research is based on a coastal archaeological site over karst, next to a river mouth in the north of Puerto Rico (northeastern corner of Caribbean Archipelago). I am excavating a site that was originally excavated in the 70s to a depth of 210cm bs. My own excavations this summer were only to 45cm. The radiocarbon dates previously published are not reliable, and I want to produce new dates. From the old excavations I only have available for dating bone or marine shell. From my own excavations I have also burnt organics, including seed, and I already sent a set of samples that will help me calibrate the local marine reservoir effect.
I want to get a date from the deepest level (200 - 210cm bs) from which I have three molluscs: Chiton, Fissurella nodosa and Astralium phoebium. These represent two different marine ecosystems: intertidal rocky shore and sea-grass. Is there any difference on their process of obtaining 14C? Does it make any difference if the species is is intertidal or submerged? Which specimen would be best to select?
The sample used in the MRE calibration is an infaunal, soft bottom species (Tagelus divisus).
Thanks in advance.
I would like to have more infos regarding the different "age plateaux " in the Northeastern part of North America from 10 000BP until the 19th Century. Thanks!
High resolution dating of events in the Black and Marmara Seas during non-marine phases requires appropriate correction of C-14 ages because shells are not in equilibrium with global values of ca. 400 yr. Proposed values range from 0 (fully mixed, in equilibrium with atmosphere, no correction needed) to 1000 yrs (benthos contain old bottom water or river transported carbon). Peat (grows in equilbrium with atmosphere) compared to in-situ shell from the same sample indicates a reservoir correction of ca. 850 yrs is needed for shells. Which correction value is correct for A) Black Sea? B) Marmara Sea with overflow water.
I'm trying to build a Bayesian model for a coastal dune stratigraphy. The oldest date is taken from marine beach barrier sediments, while the other, more recent, dates are taken from gyttja layers (associated with archaeological remains) embedded within dune sediments
I know about the Carbon dating but facilities are not available in our laboratory. Is any other laboratory methods for the study of fossil sample? How can I start my study on a fossil sample. Please suggest and guide about the procedure.
Colleagues, I am researching the prevalence of cleft lip (CPOs) among Asians and Native American and I would like to know if there is anyone out there who knows whether its ocurrence in DNA guarantees that an individual will be born with a cleft lip. I radiocarbon dated an infant to 13,100 years ago who has cleft lip n the genome and am currently writing a paper about this infant boy who was buried with 100 stone tools and 15 fragments of antler tools. He was very special---children are not usually buried with such an enormous array of grave goods. Please help if youl can answer y questions. References requested. Sincere thanks, Juliet Morrow
We've obtained a few radiocarbon dates from EIA Lower Danube Area and we need others to compare (excluding the older ones from Kastanas, Troy, Assiros, Durankulak, Odaia, Siret, Popesti, Mahala, Stepnoj, Lapus, Nemetbanya, Borcs and Gomolava). Any suggestions?
Smaller alterations in radiocarbon dated samples are often very hard to recognise. Is it possible to use the N14 content as an indicator of samples reliability?
The idea of a collaboration between scientists and geologists and archaeologists saw light 1954 at the Princeton Institute of Advance Studies, when Oppenheimer, previously the Head of the Manhattan Project suggested to use nuclear chemistry for the benefit of solving questions that were of archaeological/geological nature.
Up to that moment, archaeological problems were solved by typological research that, for example, in the field of ceramics--usually the bulk of all archaeological finds-- was based on style, workmanship, finishing and decoration as well as the function of a pot. By studying it into the smallest details, archaeologists paved the way for making comparisons between a specifically made style of pottery at the place where it was manufactured and the site where the same style was found elsewhere.
By doing so, a link was established between the source (Site A) and the excavation (Site B). Once that link was present, one tried to explain the connections that took place by means of trade, migration and/or social human behaviour encounters. This works and worked when the production sites are known and secondly when pottery was not imitated somewhere else, which cannot be discerned by the naked eye or microscopy.
When the Archaeometry Unit was founded in Dec. 1973 in the Institute of Archaeology at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, we applied instrumental neutron activation analysis (INAA) to ceramics from many excavations, which requires a nuclear reactor to obtain a chemical fingerprint of a clay source which is site-specific and thus also the pottery made of such a source can be traced.
However, provenance research is just one item of the gamma of domains that should make up archaeometry. So, in 2000, I decided to open our limited access to archaeometry to all the domains, which are available: Humanities, Social Sciences, Nuclear-, Optical-, Mathematical- and Biological of nature by making "Qumran and the Dead Sea scrolls" as the project that would encompass all the domains, which constitute archaeometry in the broadest sense.
After collaborative research with 157 scientists from 45 Institutions in 17 countries worldwide, we published four books and additional papers in six scientific magazines.
I finally reached the start of the goal which was originally envisioned by the founding fathers of archaeometry. Today, I am asking: "What is your experience concerning the handshake between archaeology and archaeometry, or is there?
This discussion is a spin-off of a post intiated from https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_do_you_see_the_integration_of_Archaeology_and_Archaeometry?_tpcectx=qa_overview&_trid=53ba748dd039b166518b462b_1
Is one C14 date sufficient to do age calibration and age-depth model? I am working on a peat deposit from which a 120 cm peat sample was extracted.
Dead roots approx 40m long found in deep soil profile up to 100m, which formed on rock of ~3Ga age. What is the best tool to date the sample like this? I will appreciate your answers.
K-Ar dating method sometimes can mislead us, for example Kilauea Iki basalt, Hawaii (A. D. 1959) dating age are 8.5±6.8 Ma (Krummenacher, 1970). But, in practice, how do we assess the reliability and uncertainty of the published K-Ar age data? What aspects should I consider about? Could someone give me some related papers or give me some advice? I just want to use the age data, and not to date the rocks.
I need to calibrate these dates so that I can be able to communicate my findings clearly to both scientific and non-scientific community. I have tried to download the CalPal-Radiocarbon software but no success.
In the mountainous regions of Central Asia we sometimes have problems with radiocarbon dating, even of plant-material. Many C-14 dates are clearly too old for their archaeological context. The phenomenon appears to more acute near high mountains, so that a possible explanation could be "old water" from glaciers - most agriculture is irrigation based, since rainfall is insufficient. It would be important to have information on the relationship between carbon integration from water and the air in various kinds of plants.