Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T10:59:38.767Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reliability of Nitrogen Content (%N) and Carbon:Nitrogen Atomic Ratios (C:N) as Indicators of Collagen Preservation Suitable for Radiocarbon Dating

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

Fiona Brock ,
Rachel Wood ,
Thomas F G Higham ,
Peter Ditchfield ,
Alex Bayliss  and
Christopher Bronk Ramsey
Fiona Brock*
Affiliation:
Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, Research Laboratory for Archaeology & The History of Art, University of Oxford, Dyson Perrins Building, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QY, United Kingdom
Rachel Wood
Affiliation:
Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, Research Laboratory for Archaeology & The History of Art, University of Oxford, Dyson Perrins Building, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QY, United Kingdom Research School of Earth Sciences, The Australian National University, ACT 0200, Australia
Thomas F G Higham
Affiliation:
Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, Research Laboratory for Archaeology & The History of Art, University of Oxford, Dyson Perrins Building, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QY, United Kingdom
Peter Ditchfield
Affiliation:
Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, Research Laboratory for Archaeology & The History of Art, University of Oxford, Dyson Perrins Building, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QY, United Kingdom
Alex Bayliss
Affiliation:
English Heritage, 1 Waterhouse Square, 138-142 Holborn St., London EC1N 2ST, United Kingdom
Christopher Bronk Ramsey
Affiliation:
Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, Research Laboratory for Archaeology & The History of Art, University of Oxford, Dyson Perrins Building, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QY, United Kingdom
*
Corresponding author. Email: fiona.brock@rlaha.ox.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A recent study into prescreening techniques to identify bones suitable for radiocarbon dating from sites known for poor or variable preservation (Brock et al. 2007, 2010a) found that the percent nitrogen (%N) content of whole bone powder was the most reliable indicator of collagen preservation. Measurement of %N is rapid, requires little preparation or material, and is relatively cheap. The technique reduces the risk of needlessly sampling valuable archaeological objects, as well as saving time and money on their unsuccessful pretreatment prior to dating. This method of prescreening is now regularly used at the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit (ORAU). In the original study, linear regression analysis of data from 100 bones from 12 Holocene sites across southern England showed that when 0.76% N was chosen as a threshold, 84% of bones were successfully identified as containing sufficient (i.e. >1%) or insufficient (i.e. <1%) collagen for dating. However, it has been observed that for older, Pleistocene bones the failure rate may be higher, possibly due to the presence of more degraded, short-chain proteins that pass through the ultrafilters used in pretreatment, resulting in lower yields. Here, we present linear regression analysis of data from nearly 600 human and animal bones, antlers, and teeth, from a wide range of contexts and ages, to determine whether the 0.76% threshold identified in the previous study is still applicable. The potential of carbon:nitrogen atomic weight ratios (C:N) of whole bone to predict collagen preservation is also discussed.

Type
Articles
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 54 , Issue 3-4 , 2012 , pp. 879 - 886
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

References

Barroso, C, editor. 2003. El Pleistoceno Superior de la Cueva del Boquete de Zafarraya. Sevilla: Junta de Andalucia.Google Scholar
Bayliss, A, Farid, S, Higham, T. Forthcoming. Time will tell: practising Bayesian chronological modelling on the East Mound. In: Hodder, I, editor. Çatalhöyük Excavations: The 2000–2008 Seasons. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology.Google Scholar
Brock, F, Higham, T, Bronk Ramsey, R. 2007. Radiocarbon dating bone sites recovered from gravel sites. English Heritage Research Department Report Series 30/2007. London: English Heritage. http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/archive/bigravels_eh_2007.Google Scholar
Brock, F, Higham, T, Bronk Ramsey, R. 2010a. Prescreening techniques for identification of samples suitable for radiocarbon dating of poorly preserved bones. Journal of Archaeological Science 37(4):855–65.Google Scholar
Brock, F, Higham, T, Ditchfield, P, Bronk Ramsey, C. 2010b. Current pretreatment methods for AMS radiocarbon dating at the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit (ORAU). Radiocarbon 52(1):103–12.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C, Higham, T, Bowles, A, Hedges, R. 2004. Improvements to the pretreatment of bone at Oxford. Radiocarbon 46(1):155–63.Google Scholar
Hedges, REM, van Klinken, GJ. 1992. A review of current approaches in the pre-treatment of bone for radiocarbon dating by AMS. Radiocarbon 34(3):279–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodder, I. 2006. The Leopard's Tale, Revealing the Mysteries of Çatalhöyük. London: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar
Jørkov, MLS, Heinemeier, J, Lynnerup, N. 2007. Evaluating bone collagen extraction methods for stable isotope analysis in dietary studies. Journal of Archaeological Science 34(11):1824–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, KJ, Hong, W, Park, JH, Woo, HJ, Hodgins, G, Jull, AJT, Lee, YJ, Kim, JY. 2011. Development of radiocarbon dating method for degraded bone samples from Korean archaeological sites. Radiocarbon 53(1):129–35.Google Scholar
Mellaart, J. 1967. Çatal Hüyük: A Neolithic Town in Anatolia. London: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar
Richards, MP, Pearson, JA, Molleson, TI, Russell, N, Martin, L. 2003. Stable isotope evidence of diet at Neolithic Çatalhöyük, Turkey. Journal of Archaeological Science 30(1):67–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sillen, A, Parkington, J. 1996. Diagenesis of bones from Eland's Bay Cave. Journal of Archaeological Science 23(4):535–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stafford, TW Jr, 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):2257–67.Google Scholar
Tisnérat-Laborde, N, Valladas, H, Kaltnecker, E, Arnold, M. 2003. AMS radiocarbon dating of bones at LSCE. Radiocarbon 45(3):409–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Klinken, GJ. 1999. Bone collagen quality indicators for palaeodietary and radiocarbon measurements. Journal of Archaeological Science 26(6):687–95.Google Scholar
Wood, RE, Bronk Ramsey, C, Higham, TFG. 2010. Refining background corrections for radiocarbon dating of bone collagen at ORAU. Radiocarbon 52(2):600–11.Google Scholar
Yonebayashi, K, Hattori, T. 1988. Chemical and biological studies on environmental humic acids, I: composition of elemental and functional groups of humic acids. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 34:571–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar