Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T14:38:55.427Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

SUITABILITY OF ACID-SOLUBLE AND ACID-INSOLUBLE LEATHER FRACTIONS IN RADIOCARBON DATING

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 October 2020

Alyssa M Tate ,
Brittany Hundman Open the ORCID record for Brittany Hundman [Opens in a new window]  and
Jonathan Heile
Alyssa M Tate
Affiliation:
DirectAMS, 11822 North Creek Pkwy N, Ste. 107, Bothell, WA98011USA
Brittany Hundman*
Affiliation:
DirectAMS, 11822 North Creek Pkwy N, Ste. 107, Bothell, WA98011USA
Jonathan Heile
Affiliation:
DirectAMS, 11822 North Creek Pkwy N, Ste. 107, Bothell, WA98011USA
*
*Corresponding author. Email: bhundman@directams.net.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Leather has been produced by a variety of methods throughout human history, providing researchers unique insight into multiple facets of social and economic life in the past. Archaeologically recovered leather is often fragile and poorly preserved, leading to the use of various conservation and restoration efforts that may include the application of fats, oils, or waxes. Such additives introduce exogenous carbon to the leather, contaminating the specimen. These contaminants, in addition to those accumulated during interment, must be removed through chemical pretreatment prior to radiocarbon (14C) dating to ensure accurate dating. DirectAMS utilizes organic solvents, acid-base-acid (ABA) and gelatinization for all leather samples. Collagen yield from leather samples is variable due to the method of production and the quality of preservation. However, evaluating the acid-soluble collagen fraction, when available, provides the most accurate 14C dates for leather samples. In instances where gelatinization does not yield sufficient material, the resulting acid-insoluble fraction may be dated. Here we examine the effectiveness of the combined organic solvent and ABA pretreatment with gelatinization for leather samples, as well as the suitability of the acid-insoluble fraction for 14C dating.

Keywords

leatherpretreatmentradiocarbon AMS dating
Type
Conference Paper
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 62 , Issue 6: Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium , December 2020 , pp. 1699 - 1706
Check for updates
Copyright
© 2020 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Selected Papers from the 9th Radiocarbon & Archaeology Symposium, Athens, GA, USA, 20–24 May 2019

References

REFERENCES

Brock, F. 2013. Radiocarbon dating of historical parchments. Radiocarbon 55(2–3):353–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brock, F, Geoghegan, V, Thomas, B, Jurkschat, K, Highman, TFG. 2013. Analysis of bone “collagen” extractions products for radiocarbon dating. Radiocarbon 55(2–3):445–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brock, F, Higham, T, Ditchfield, P, Bronk Ramsey, C. 2010. Current pretreatment methods for AMS radiocarbon dating at the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit (ORAU). Radiocarbon 52(1):103–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C. 2009. Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon dates. Radiocarbon 51(1):337–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruhn, F, Duhr, A, Grootes, P, Mintrop, A, Nadeau, M. 2001. Chemical removal of conservation substances by ‘Soxhlet’-type extraction. Radiocarbon 43(2A):229–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherkinsky, A. 2009. Can we get a good radiocarbon age from ‘bad bone’—determining the reliability of radiocarbon age from bioapatite. Radiocarbon 51(2):647–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Vries, HL, Barendsen, GW. 1954. Measurements of age by the carbon-14 technique. Nature 174(4442):1138–1141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dee, MW, Palstra, SWL, Aerts-Bijma, AT, Bleeker, MO, de Bruijn, S, Ghebru, F, Jansen, HG, Kuitems, M, Paul, D, Richie, RR, Spriensma, JJ, Scifo, A, Van Zonneveld, D, Verstappen-Dumoulin, BMAA, Wietzes-Land, P, Meijer, HAJ. 2020. Radiocarbon dating at Groningen: new and updated chemical pretreatment procedures. Radiocarbon 62(1):63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilligan, I. 2010. The prehistoric development of clothing: archaeological implications of a thermal model. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 17(1):15–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groenman van Waateringe, W, Kilian, N, van Londen, H. 1999. The curing of hides and skins in European prehistory. Antiquity 73:884–890.Google Scholar
Hajdas, I, Cristi, C, Bonani, G, Maurer, M. 2014. Textiles and radiocarbon dating. Radiocarbon 56(2):637–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedges, REM, Law, IA, Bronk, CR, Housley, RA. 1989. The Oxford Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Facility: technical developments in routine dating. Archaeometry 31:99–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Clercq, M, van der Plicht, J, Gröning, M. 1998. New 14C reference materials with activities of 15 and 50 pMC. Radiocarbon 40(1):295–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longin, R. 1971. New method of collagen extraction for radiocarbon dating. Nature 230:241–242.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maxwell, CA. 2007. Animal hide processing: impact on collagen structure [doctoral dissertation]. Cardiff University. Retrieved from British Library Ethos Collection. (0000 0004 2750 361X).Google Scholar
Phillips, H. 1954. The chemistry of leather. Journal of the Royal Society of Arts 102(4932):824–875.Google Scholar
Reimer, PJ, Bard, E, Bayliss, A, Beck, JW, Blackwell, PG, Bronk Ramsey, C, Buck, CE, Cheng, H, Edwards, RL, Friedrich, M, Grootes, PM, Guilderson, TP, Haflidason, H, Hajdas, I, Hatté, C, Heaton, TJ, Hogg, AG, Hughen, KA, Kaiser, KF, Kromer, B, Manning, SW, Niu, M, Reimer, RW, Richards, DA, Scott, EM, Southon, JR, Turney, CSM, van der Plicht, J. 2013. IntCal13 and Marine13 radiocarbon age calibration curves 0–50,000 years cal BP. Radiocarbon 55(4):1869–1887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rifkin, RF. 2011. Assessing the efficacy of red ochre as a prehistoric hide tanning ingredient. Journal of African Archaeology 9(2):131–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, EM, Cook, GT, Naysmith, P. 2007. Error and uncertainty in radiocarbon measurements. Radiocarbon 49(2):427–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stafford, T, Brendel, K, Duhamel, RC. 1988. Radiocarbon, 13C and 15N analysis of fossil bone: removal of humates with XAD-2 resin. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 52(9):2257–2267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Klinken, G, Hedges, R. 1997. Chemistry strategies for organic 14C samples. Radiocarbon 40(1):51–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogel, JS, Southon, JR, Nelson, D, Brown, TA. 1984. Performance of catalytically condensed carbon for use in accelerator mass spectrometry. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 5(2):289–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, X, Trumbore, S, Zheng, S, Southon, J, McDuffee, K, Luttgen, M, Liu, J. 2007. Modifying a sealed tube zinc reduction method for preparation of AMS graphite targets: reducing background and attaining high precision. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 259(1):320–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zoppi, U, Crye, J, Song, Q, Arjomand, A. 2007. Performance evaluation of the new AMS system at Accium BioSciences. Radiocarbon 49(1):171–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar