The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 7 of the 20 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Radiocarbon Dating of “Old” Charcoal Using a Wet Oxidation, Stepped-Combustion Procedure
Open accessAbstract
We present results that validate a new wet oxidation, stepped-combustion procedure for dating “old” charcoal samples. An acid–base–wet oxidation (ABOX) pretreatment procedure has been developed that is used in place of the conventional acid-base-acid (ABA) pretreatment. Combustions and graphitizations are performed in a vacuum line that is insulated from the atmosphere by a second backing vacuum to eliminate the risk of atmospheric leakage into the line at any stage of the procedure. Combustions are performed at 3 temperatures (330 °, 630 ° and 850 °) with a graphite target produced from the CO2 evolved during each combustion step. In this way, the removal of any contamination can be monitored, and a high degree of confidence can be placed on the final age. The pretreatment, combustion, graphitization, and measurement blank for the procedure, based on the analysis of a “radiocarbon-dead” graphite, is 0.5 ± 0.5 μg C (1σ, n=14), equivalent to 0.04 ± 0.02 pMC or an “age” of approximately 60 ka for a 1 mg graphite target. Analyses of a “radiocarbon-dead” natural charcoal after ABOX pretreatment and stepped combustion suggest that the total blank (including contamination not removed by pretreatment) may be higher than for graphite, ranging up to 0.10 ± 0.02 pMC. Additional experiments confirm good agreement with accepted values for the international low-14C “New Kauri” standard (0.16–0.25 pMC). They also confirm excellent reproducibility, with 3 separate dates on different aliquots of a charcoal sample from Ngarrabullgan Cave (Queensland, Australia) ranging from 35.2 to 35.5 ka 14C BP. It is also demonstrated that the ABOX pretreatment, in conjunction with the new vacuum line described here, is able to remove contamination not removed by the conventional ABA pretreatment, suggesting that the technique can be used to produce reliable 14C dates on charcoal up to at least 50 ka.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
7 of 20 cited sources checked · 1 supported · 1 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“Previous studies have demonstrated that the major source of introduced contamination in the com- bustion of samples for 14C analysis comes from the copper oxide used during combustion (Vogel et al. 1987;Vandeputte et al. 1998).”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Disputedcites Vogel et al. 1987 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In “Contamination During Combustion” (page not provided), replacing copper oxide with ultra-pure oxygen produced indistinguishable results, and changing the amount of copper oxide did not change measured ¹⁴C. The paper instead identifies the Vycor combustion tube as the likely source and reports lower background when Pyrex tubes were used. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
- Not matchedcites Vandeputte et al. 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Disputed
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“However, in some cases it has been demonstrated that the ABA pretreatment does not remove all contaminants (e.g.Gillespie et al. 1992; Gillespie 1.997)”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Gillespie et al. 1992 source
The Conclusions state that the commonly used acid/base/acid pretreatment did not yield acceptable dates for the Graham’s Terrace sediments. They explain that younger contaminants, particularly humic materials, resisted standard pretreatment in these fine-grained sediments. This supports the citing sentence’s qualifier, “in some cases.” (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Not matchedcites Gillespie 1.997
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Work by Cachier et al. (1989) has shown that this treatment will remove organic contaminants with minimal removal of black carbon from aerosol samples.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Combustion
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Cachier et al. (1989) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 3.4 says precombustion removes organic matter while seeking to minimize soot-carbon loss. It specifies 340 °C for two hours—not 330 °C—and estimates a 24% loss of refractory carbon under those conditions, so the claim’s temperature and unqualified description of minimal loss are not supported. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Partly supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is also demonstrated that the ABOX pretreatment, in conjunction with the new vacuum line described here, is able to remove contamination not removed by the conventional ABA pretreatment”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Abstract
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Analyses of a”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Abstract
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For the samples that were subjected only to an acid-base pretreatment, it is evident that minor contamination is introduced to the sample during these initial steps, most likely from adsorption of atmospheric CO2 by the alkaline solution.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- The authors state this as an assumption: The delta 13C values for ANU sucrose and charcoal are -11 per mil and -25 per mil, respectively, and a fractionation correction of 14 per mil (equivalent to 110 years) applies to each charcoal sample.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The true blank for natural charcoal lies between the average value for the ABOX pretreated 850 degrees C fraction of Black Mountain charcoal and the Ceylon graphite blank (0.07 ± 0.05 pMC).
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All 5 samples show a significant shift to older ages from the 330 °C to 630 °C step (Table 1 and Fig- ure 6).”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- The authors state this as an assumption: The delta 13C values for ANU sucrose and charcoal are -11 per mil and -25 per mil, respectively, and a fractionation correction of 14 per mil (equivalent to 110 years) applies to each charcoal sample.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The true blank for natural charcoal lies between the average value for the ABOX pretreated 850 degrees C fraction of Black Mountain charcoal and the Ceylon graphite blank (0.07 ± 0.05 pMC).
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The weighted mean 14C age (equivalent to the age that would have been obtained from complete combustion) of the untreated and ABA pretreated samples for all combustion steps (41.6 and 46.3 ka) are significantly younger at the 26 level than the cone- sponding weighted mean age for the ABOX pretreated sample (51.3 ka).”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The values obtained from these 4 samples are statistically indistinguishable from the 10 samples that were not subjected to any pre- treatment prior to combustion.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“A sample previously analyzed from this deposit subjected to the ABOX pretreatment (without stepped combustion) also returned an age at the upper extreme of the dated sample population (OZC-733, 35.5 ± 0.6 ka; Roberts et al. 1994)”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Roberts et al. 1994 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- The authors state this as an assumption: The delta 13C values for ANU sucrose and charcoal are -11 per mil and -25 per mil, respectively, and a fractionation correction of 14 per mil (equivalent to 110 years) applies to each charcoal sample.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The true blank for natural charcoal lies between the average value for the ABOX pretreated 850 degrees C fraction of Black Mountain charcoal and the Ceylon graphite blank (0.07 ± 0.05 pMC).
- It may state two separate claims as one. 29
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
- Probably not a substantial claim. 21
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“This blank is at least an order of magnitude lower than the 0.7% modern carbon that would be equivalent to an age of 40 ka, and is 2-10 times lower than commonly reported procedural blanks (Kitagawa et al. 1993;Vogel et al. 1987;Gagnon and Jones 1993).”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Kitagawa et al. 1993 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The “14C Background (or Blank) Levels” section (page not provided) reports a procedural background of 0.112 ± 0.057 percent modern carbon, so the paper supplies an example of a blank for comparison. It measures targets made from Yubari Mine coal, not a Ceylon graphite blank, and does not establish either the claimed order-of-magnitude difference from 0.7% or the 2–10-fold comparison. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Partly supportedcites Vogel et al. 1987 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Contamination During Graphitization section reports anthracite backgrounds of 0.59 ± 0.24% modern, reduced to 0.44 ± 0.13% modern, providing a procedural-background comparison. It does not state the citing paper’s blank value, the 2–10-fold comparison, or that 0.7% modern is equivalent to 40 ka. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Partly supportedcites Gagnon and Jones 1993 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report procedural blank values of 0.256% modern carbon for carbonate and 0.762% for organic carbon; the Conclusions equate the latter with about 39 ka, close to the cited 0.7% and 40 ka benchmark. The paper does not report a Ceylon graphite blank or establish that it is an order of magnitude below 0.7% modern carbon or 2–10 times below those procedural blanks. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“the results for this standard, which range from 0.16 ± 0.06 pMC to 0.25 ± 0.06 pMC (48-51.7 ka), are internally consistent and comparable within error to the accepted range of values for this standard (0.12-0.21 pMC; Hogg et al. 1995).”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Hogg et al. 1995 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Laboratory Analysis section gives the same 0.12–0.21 pMC range for the new kauri standard, but proposes applying it provisionally until unresolved measurement problems are addressed; it does not call it an accepted range. The cited paper does not report the citing authors’ 0.16–0.25 pMC results, which are presented as their own findings. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Additional experiments confirm good agreement with accepted values for the international low-14C”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Abstract
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesThe quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The pretreatment, combustion, graphitization, and measurement blank for the procedure, based on the analysis of a”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Abstract
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They also confirm excellent reproducibility, with 3 separate dates on different aliquots of a charcoal sample from Ngarrabullgan Cave (Queen- sland, Australia) ranging from 35.2 to 35.5 ka 14C BP.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Abstract
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For ABOX-pretreated samples, the results indicate that consistent, reproducible ages can be obtained from the 850 °C fraction, and possibly from the 630 °C fraction, but not from the 330 °C fraction (Figure 6).”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The delta 13C values for ANU sucrose and charcoal are -11 per mil and -25 per mil, respectively, and a fractionation correction of 14 per mil (equivalent to 110 years) applies to each charcoal sample.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The true blank for natural charcoal lies between the average value for the ABOX pretreated 850 degrees C fraction of Black Mountain charcoal and the Ceylon graphite blank (0.07 ± 0.05 pMC).
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It should also be noted that calculated blanks in excess of 1 µg were from the first 2 Ceylon graphites prepared using the combustion line, and calculated blanks for all subsequent analyses have been consistently lower.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The ABOX pretreatment alone does not remove all contamination, as the lower temperature fractions of the step-combusted ABOX pretreated sample have younger 14C ages ( 37.7 and 51.3 ka) than the 850 °C fraction (55.9 ka).”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No ABA-treated sample was ana- lyzed, as the results from the untreated and ABOX-treated samples indicate that the Ngarrabullgan sample is virtually uncontaminated.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The delta 13C values for ANU sucrose and charcoal are -11 per mil and -25 per mil, respectively, and a fractionation correction of 14 per mil (equivalent to 110 years) applies to each charcoal sample.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The true blank for natural charcoal lies between the average value for the ABOX pretreated 850 degrees C fraction of Black Mountain charcoal and the Ceylon graphite blank (0.07 ± 0.05 pMC).
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Neither the stepped combustion of an unpretreated sample nor an ABA pretreatment with stepped combustion is sufficient to remove all contaminants.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The samples spanned a range of graphite weights from 0.1 to 2.2 mg, and the corresponding amount of modern carbon that would account for the observed pMC varies between about 0.1 and 1.7 µg, giving an average of approximately 0.5 ± 0.5 µg (16, n=14, equivalent to -60 ka for a 1 mg graphite target).”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The resulting 14C ages of 60.7 and 62.4 ka BP (0.05 and 0.04 pMC, respectively) are statistically indistinguishable”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All 14 measurements are consistent with the mean value of 0.04 pMC (x2v =1.2) and the stan- dard deviation of the data set is 0.02 pMC (Figure 3).”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the case of untreated graphite, very little CO2 was produced in the 330 °C or 630 °C combustion steps, so the 3 targets were made from 3 combustions at 850 °C (850 I, II, III; Table 1).”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Combustion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The precombustion of the Fe powder does not appear to affect its catalytic action during the conversion of CO2 to graphite.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Graphitization
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Combustions are performed at 3 temperatures (330 °C, 630 °C and 850 °C) with a graphite target produced from the CO2 evolved during each combustion step.In this way, the removal of any contamination can be monitored, and a high degree of confidence can be placed on the final age.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Abstract
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Combustions and graphitizations are performed in a vacuum line that is insu- lated from the atmosphere by a second backing vacuum to eliminate the risk of atmospheric leakage into the line at any stage of the procedure.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Abstract
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The proportion of OREC left after oxidation for 72 h depends on the nature of the charcoal and can range widely from 20 to 80%.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Pretreatment
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bird and Grocke (1997) source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This sample represents a worst case in that it is overlain by a vegetated soil profile and has been exposed to infiltrating waters and the organic compounds carried by those waters since deposition of the sediments and subsequent pedogenesis.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A substantial body of dates have been published for this unit, with 19 14C determinations spanning 28.8-34.614Cka BP (David et al. 1997).”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Samples
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites David et al. 1997 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An additional step used in our procedure is a preoxidation of approximately 0.5 to 1.0 mg iron pow- der (Merck; 10 µm) to remove carbonaceous contaminants present in the Fe powder, or introduced during the sample loading procedure.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Graphitization
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“whereas the advent of luminescence techniques in the 1980s suggested that humans may have arrived at 54-60 ka BP (the”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Roberts et al. 1994 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which has been substantially protected from interaction with infiltrating waters (discussed below).”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The stepped combustion removes contaminants present in the copper oxide and/or introduced during sample loading, and also removes contamination from samples not removed by the ABOX pretreatment.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > CONCLUSION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and the removal of all contamination must be verifiable.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > INTRODUCTION
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It therefore seems that although total combustion can produce reliable ages on charcoal, the effective limit of the 14C technique will be considerably younger for samples that are analyzed by total combustion.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“suggesting that the few '4C atoms observed may already be present in the Ceylon graphite itself or were possibly added during target pressing.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Detecting sample contamination and verifying the reliability of the ages produced also become more difficult as the age of the sample increases.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > INTRODUCTION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The other procedures used in this study, including preoxidation of the iron powder, use of molecular sieves, storage of samples in vacuo and the use of a vacuum-backed extraction line, may also con- tribute to overall blank reduction, but more importantly, guard against random contamination of individual samples.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > CONCLUSION
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The completeness of the graphitization for the 850 °C (C) fraction can then be checked by measuring the total pressure, and CO2 pressure at the end of the reaction period.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Graphitization
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The so-called”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > INTRODUCTION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Significant contamination of samples from atmospheric leakage into the extraction line can poten- tially occur during the combustion of the sample to C02, or during graphitization.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Combustion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Early 14C determinations suggested that humans first arrived about 40 ka BP (the”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Allen and Holdaway 1995 source
- Not matchedcites O'Connell and Allen 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A graphite target is generally made from the CO2 produced during each combustion step (i.e., 330 °C, 630 °C, and 850 °C).In this way it is expected that any contaminants remaining after the sample pretreatment will be combusted in the 330 °C step, and that the reliability of the 14C age can be assessed by the coherence of the results from the 630 °C and 850 °C steps.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Combustion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Oxidation removes less resistant phases first, working progressively from the outside to the interior of the particles.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The unit is thought to have undergone pedogenesis during a period of climatic stability similar to the present, and is likely to be at least of last interglacial age.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Samples
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In practice this means that many laboratories will only quote 14C ages to about 40 ka BP (thousands of '4C years Before Present), with ages greater than this generally considered to be”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > INTRODUCTION
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All pretreatment steps are carried out in either a laminated flow cabinet, a HEPA-filtered clean lab, or capped vials, with all vessels and implements precleaned either by combustion overnight at 550 °C (Pyrex®) or 850 °C (quartz), or by washing with a hot solution of O.1 M K2Cr2O7 in a 2M solution of H2SO4.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Pretreatment
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, in the case of the AB-treated samples, there is a suggestion that the ages become younger for the 850 °C fraction, possibly owing to formation of Na2CO3, which has a decarbonation temperature of 851 °C.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The delta 13C values for ANU sucrose and charcoal are -11 per mil and -25 per mil, respectively, and a fractionation correction of 14 per mil (equivalent to 110 years) applies to each charcoal sample.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The true blank for natural charcoal lies between the average value for the ABOX pretreated 850 degrees C fraction of Black Mountain charcoal and the Ceylon graphite blank (0.07 ± 0.05 pMC).
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The production of reliable 14C dates on old archaeological charcoal samples can assist in this respect.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > INTRODUCTION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Resolution of this discrepancy is important for a refined understanding of early human migration and colonization of the continent as well as of the ecological effects accompanying human colonization.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > INTRODUCTION
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The buried paleosol has been subject to infiltrating waters carrying organic compounds from the vegetated surface.Interactions between the charcoal and groundwater are evidenced by fine gypsum crystals deposited on the surface of some fragments.”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > Samples
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, the ages must be reproducible within the stated error bounds”
§ RADIOCARBON DATING OF "OLD" CHARCOAL USING A WET OXIDATION, STEPPED-COMBUSTION PROCEDURE > INTRODUCTION
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper relies on this without support.
Oxidation removes less resistant phases first, working progressively from the outside to the interior of the particles.
“This is because oxi- dation can be expected to remove less resistant phases first, and work progressively from the outside to the interior of the particles.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
For a 14C date to be considered reliable at 50 ka, the combined blank from natural contamination and laboratory handling should be equivalent to a 14C age of at least 55 ka.
“We believe that for a 14C date to be considered reliable at 50 ka, for example, the combined blank from natural contamination and laboratory handling should be equivalent to a 14C age of at least 55 ka.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The 330 °C combustion step removes contaminants introduced during loading or adsorbed onto the sample surface.
“This step serves to remove contaminants that may have been introduced during the loading procedure or that are adsorbed onto the sample surface.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The delta 13C values for ANU sucrose and charcoal are -11 per mil and -25 per mil, respectively, and a fractionation correction of 14 per mil (equivalent to 110 years) applies to each charcoal sample.
“Although the 613C value has not been mea- sured, it has been assumed that ANU sucrose and charcoal have values of -11%o and -25%, respec- tively, and hence a fractionation correction of 14% (equivalent to 110 yr) has been applied to each of the charcoal samples.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The true blank for natural charcoal lies between the average value for the ABOX pretreated 850 degrees C fraction of Black Mountain charcoal and the Ceylon graphite blank (0.07 ± 0.05 pMC).
“A conservative approach to assigning a blank value to analyses of natural charcoals would be to assume that the true blank lies between the average value obtained for the ABOX pre- treated 850 °C fraction of the Black Mountain charcoal and the blank obtained for the Ceylon graph- ite (i.e., 0.07 ± 0.05 pMC).”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Sedimentology analysis and reconstruction of sedimentation conditions of the Tonto Group [Grand Canyon] reveals that deposits of different stratigraphic sub-divisions were formed simultaneously in different litho-dynamical zones of the Cambrian paleobasin.”
From The Search for Solutions to Mysterious Anomalies in the Geologic Column (2019) · cites this paper as [34]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“[34] showed that sediments formed simultaneously by size and density in moving waters spontaneously in the disastrous Bijou Flood in Colorado of 1965.”
From The Search for Solutions to Mysterious Anomalies in the Geologic Column (2019) · cites this paper as [34]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Citations
Cites
Performance of catalytically condensed carbon for use in accelerator mass spectrometry
Vogel, J. S., Southon, J. R., Nelson, D. E., & Brown, T. A. (1984) · Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms · doi:10.1016/0168-583x(84)90529-9 · Cited by 695
Determination of atmospheric soot carbon with a simple thermal method
Cachier, H., Bremond, M.-P., & Buat-Ménard, P. (1989) · Tellus B: Chemical and Physical Meteorology · doi:10.3402/tellusb.v41i3.15095 · Cited by 339
Roberts, R. G., Jones, R., Spooner, N. A., Head, M. J., Murray, A. S., & Smith, M. A. (1994) · Quaternary Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/0277-3791(94)90080-9 · Cited by 330
14C Background Levels in An Accelerator Mass Spectrometry System
Vogel, J. S., Nelson, D. E., & Southon, J. R. (1987) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200043733 · Cited by 286
A Batch Preparation Method for Graphite Targets With Low Background for AMS 14C Measurements
Kitagawa, H., Masuzawa, T., Makamura, T., & Matsumoto, E. (1993) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200064973 · Cited by 260
Determination of the abundance and carbon isotope composition of elemental carbon in sediments
Bird, M. I., & Gröcke, D. R. (1997) · Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta · doi:10.1016/s0016-7037(97)00157-9 · Cited by 193
Self-citationBeyond the radiocarbon limit in Australian archaeology and Quaternary research
Chappell, J., Head, J., & Magee, J. (1996) · Antiquity · doi:10.1017/s0003598x00083708 · Cited by 90
Burnt and Unburnt Carbon: Dating Charcoal and Burnt Bone from the Willandra Lakes, Australia
Gillespie, R. (1997) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200053236 · Cited by 69
The contamination of Pleistocene radiocarbon determinations in Australia
Allen, J., & Holdaway, S. (1995) · Antiquity · doi:10.1017/s0003598x00064334 · Cited by 60
David, B., Roberts, R., Tuniz, C., Jones, R., & Head, J. (1997) · Antiquity · doi:10.1017/s0003598x00084672 · Cited by 54
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 16 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Mull, 1998, The effect of NOx and CO on the rate of transition metal oxide catalysed black carbon oxidation – an exploratory study, Applied Catalysis B – Environmental, 17
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 316
Williams, A., Ulm, S., Smith, M., & Reid, J. (2014) · Internet Archaeology · doi:10.11141/ia.36.6 · Cited by 23
“This is a period that saw significant advances in pre-treatment, measurement (e.g. Accelerator Mass Spectrometry), and instruments for radiocarbon dating (e.g. Bird et al. 1999; Hedges and Gowlett 1984), and improves the reliability of the dates within the dataset.”
BackgroundHOGG, A., Fifield, L. K., TURNEY, C. S. M., Palmer, J., Galbraith, R. F., & Baillie, M. G. L. (2006) · Quaternary Geochronology · doi:10.1016/j.quageo.2006.11.001 · Cited by 60
“For low-background AMS measurements, the state-ofthe-art in sample preparation is that described by Bird et al. (1999), and extended to old wood samples by Santos et al.”
MethodInfluentialSelf-citationReassessing the chronology of the archaeological site of Anzick
Becerra‐Valdivia, L., Waters, M. R., Stafford, T. W., Anzick, S. L., Comeskey, D. J., Devièse, T., & Higham, T. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1803624115 · Cited by 60
Roberts, P., Boivin, N. L., & Petraglia, M. D. (2015) · Journal of World Prehistory · doi:10.1007/s10963-015-9085-5 · Cited by 60
Short overlap of humans and megafauna in Pleistocene Australia
Gillespie, R., Brook, B. W., & Baynes, A. (2006) · Alcheringa An Australasian Journal of Palaeontology · doi:10.1080/03115510609506861 · Cited by 59
“The OREC method was modified for 14C analysis of charcoal by Bird et al. (1999), who introduced the acid-basedichromate oxidation sequence with 3-stage stepped combustion (ABOX-SC), substituting an alkali extraction before the acid/dichromate oxidation for the alkali/peroxide oxidation, although…”
BackgroundMethodRadiocarbon dating and chronology of the Early Upper Paleolithic at Kostenki
Синицын, А. А., & Hoffecker, J. F. (2006) · Quaternary International · doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2005.12.007 · Cited by 59
Hunt, C. O., Gilbertson, D. D., & Rushworth, G. (2007) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2007.02.023 · Cited by 59
Hajdas, I., Bonani, G., Furrer, H., Mäder, A., & Schoch, W. H. (2006) · Quaternary International · doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2006.10.007 · Cited by 59
“Bird et al. (1999) applied two methods of oxidizing, using a highly oxidizing agent of acid dichromate solution, the so-called ‘wet oxidation’ (ABOX), and pre-combustion of the sample at lower temperatures (330 and 630 1C) prior to the final combustion at 850 1C.”
MethodBanks, W. E., Bertran, P., Ducasse, S., Klaric, L., Lanos, P., Renard, C., & Mesa, M. (2019) · Quaternary Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2019.07.025 · Cited by 61
14C Dating of the Upper Paleolithic Site at Krems-Hundssteig in Lower Austria
Wild, E. M., Neugebauer-Maresch, C., Einwögerer, T., Stadler, P., Steier, P., & Brock, F. (2008) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200043332 · Cited by 57
“All subsequent articles and monographs (e.g. Broglio and Laplace 1966; Hahn 1977) referred to this paper, and as a result the findings from Krems-Hundssteig were interpreted as the remains of a single cultural phase.”
Bird, M. I., Levchenko, V. A., Ascough, P. L., Meredith, W., Wurster, C. M., Williams, A., Tilston, E. L., Snape, C. E., & Apperley, D. C. (2014) · Quaternary Geochronology · doi:10.1016/j.quageo.2014.02.003 · Cited by 55
Self-citationThe Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition: dating, stratigraphy, and isochronous markers
Blockley, S. P. E., Ramsey, C. B., & Higham, T. (2008) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2008.08.009 · Cited by 55
“This conclusion is in line with several detailed studies of the difficulties in analyzing very old material (Bird et al., 1999).”
BackgroundMethodResultJull, A. J. T. (2007) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b0-44-452747-8/00041-7 · Cited by 60
Bazgir, B., Ollé, A., Tumung, L., Becerra‐Valdivia, L., Douka, K., Higham, T., van der Made, J., Picin, A., Saladié, P., López‐García, J. M., et al. (2017) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep43460 · Cited by 55
Santos, G. M., Bird, M. I., Pillans, B. J., Fifield, L. K., Alloway, B. V., Chappell, J., Hausladen, P. A., & Arneth, A. (2001) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200038066 · Cited by 53
“…of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, Private Bag 2000, Taupo, New Zealand 5Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, Postfach 100164, 07701 Jena, Germany 240 G M Santos et al. The acid-base-wet oxidation pretreatment with stepped combustion (ABOX-SC) has been described by Bird et al. (1999).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationThevenon, F., Bard, É., Williamson, D., & Beaufort, L. (2004) · Palaeogeography Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology · doi:10.1016/s0031-0182(04)00364-5 · Cited by 79
“However, Bird and Gröcke (1997) and Bird et al. (1999) suggested that an additional peroxide or thermal oxidation step can improve the removal of any remaining refractory organic carbon.”
BackgroundRadiocarbon Intercomparison Program for Chauvet Cave
Cuzange, M.-T., Delqué-Količ, E., Goslar, T., Grootes, P. M., Higham, T., Kaltnecker, E., Nadeau, M.-J., Oberlin, C., Paterne, M., van der Plicht, J., et al. (2007) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200042272 · Cited by 53
“Whereas the ABA pretreatment was used by all laboratories, the Oxford team also performed the ABOX treatment (Bird et al. 1999) using 14C Intercomparison Program for Chauvet Cave 341 precombustion at 330 °C, or 630 °C in the case of sample GC40.”
MethodAccelerator mass spectrometry: Is the future bigger or smaller?
Jull, A. J. T., & Burr, G. S. (2006) · Earth and Planetary Science Letters · doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2005.12.018 · Cited by 55
The Archaeology of Foraging and Farming at Niah Cave, Sarawak
Barker, G. (2005) · Asian perspectives · doi:10.1353/asi.2005.0004 · Cited by 52
“Those samples with the Niah prefix were dated by Michael Bird using the ABOX-SC sample preparation (see Bird et al. 1999).”
MethodCohen‐Ofri, I., Popovitz‐Biro, R., & Weiner, S. (2006) · Chemistry - A European Journal · doi:10.1002/chem.200600920 · Cited by 51
Radiocarbon Dating of the Human Occupation of Australia Prior to 40 ka BP—Successes and Pitfalls
Fifield, L. K., Bird, M. I., TURNEY, C. S. M., Hausladen, P. A., Santos, G. M., & Tada, M. (2001) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200041795 · Cited by 51
Self-citationBrock, F., & Higham, T. (2009) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200056149 · Cited by 47
“At the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Laboratory (ORAU), we have applied an ABOx-SC technique based on that of Bird et al. (1999) to charcoal samples from several Paleolithic sites.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialShanahan, T. M., Beck, J., Overpeck, J. T., McKay, N. P., Pigati, J. S., Peck, J. A., Scholz, C. A., Heil, C. W., & King, J. W. (2012) · Palaeogeography Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology · doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2012.08.001 · Cited by 51
Charcoal and mollusc shell 14 C-dating of the Dunaszekcső loess record, Hungary
Újvári, G., Molnár, M., & Páll‐Gergely, B. (2016) · Quaternary Geochronology · doi:10.1016/j.quageo.2016.05.005 · Cited by 49
Pargeter, J., Loftus, E., Mackay, A., Mitchell, P. J., & Stewart, B. A. (2018) · Azania Archaeological Research in Africa · doi:10.1080/0067270x.2018.1436740 · Cited by 53
“The ABOx-SC protocol is more effective at removing contaminating carbon, particularly humic acids from charcoals, and generally produces older dates than other pretreatment methods (Bird et al. 1999; Wood et al. 2012).”
BackgroundShanahan, T. M., Peck, J. A., McKay, N. P., Heil, C. W., King, J. W., Forman, S. L., Hoffmann, D. L., Richards, D. A., Overpeck, J. T., & Scholz, C. A. (2012) · Quaternary Geochronology · doi:10.1016/j.quageo.2012.12.001 · Cited by 49
“…and to extend the radiocarbon agemodel, we prepared an additional set of samples using the more rigorous acid base oxidation (ABOX) pretreatment procedure, which removes more of the labile carbon (Bird et al., 1999), and graphitized the samples on a low-blank radiocarbon line (Pigati et al., 2007).”
MethodInfluentialDeLong, S. B., & Arnold, L. J. (2006) · Quaternary Geochronology · doi:10.1016/j.quageo.2006.03.012 · Cited by 49
A Late Pleistocene vegetation history from the Australian semi-arid zone
Field, J. H., Dodson, J., & Prosser, I. P. (2002) · Quaternary Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0277-3791(01)00057-9 · Cited by 48
Stutz, A. J., Shea, J. J., Rech, J. A., Pigati, J. S., Wilson, J., Belmaker, M., Albert, R. M., Arpin, T. L., Cabanes, D., Clark, J. L., et al. (2015) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2015.04.008 · Cited by 46
“However, previous studies have shown that ABA pretreatment often yields dates on old (>40 ka) charcoal that are too young, because of incomplete removal of small amounts of contamination (e.g., Bird et al., 1999).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialPopulating PEP II: the dispersal of humans and agriculture through Austral-Asia and Oceania
Bird, M. I., Hope, G., & Taylor, D. (2004) · Quaternary International · doi:10.1016/s1040-6182(03)00135-6 · Cited by 34
“Recent re-investigation of the sedimentary sequence at the Nauwalabila site using the ABOX-SC radiocarbon dating methodology of Bird et al. (1999) found no reason to doubt the veracity of the published luminescence chronology (Bird et al., 2002).”
MethodSelf-citationThe Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic transition occupations from Cova Foradada (Calafell, NE Iberia)
Morales, J. I., Cebrià, A., Burguet-Coca, A., Fernández‐Marchena, J. L., García-Argudo, G., Rodríguez‐Hidalgo, A., Soto, M., Talamo, S., Tejero, J.-M., Vallverdú, J., et al. (2019) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0215832 · Cited by 46
Revised Moche Chronology Based on Bayesian Models of Reliable Radiocarbon Dates
Koons, M. L., & Alex, B. (2014) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.2458/56.16919 · Cited by 46
“2004) or ABOx-SC (acid-base-oxidation followed by stepped combustion) for charcoal (Bird et al. 1999).”
BackgroundMethodGilbertson, D. D., Bird, M. I., Hunt, C. O., et al. (2005) · Asian perspectives · doi:10.1353/asi.2005.0007 · Cited by 45
Self-citationAge of the Lake Mungo 3 skeleton, reply to Bowler & Magee and to Gillespie & Roberts
Grün, R., Spooner, N. A., Thorne, A., Mortimer, G. E., Simpson, J. J., McCulloch, M. T., Taylor, L., & Curnoe, D. (2000) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1006/jhev.2000.0399 · Cited by 44
Evaluation of iron and cobalt powders as catalysts for 14C-AMS target preparation
Santos, G. M., Mazon, M., Southon, J. R., Rifai, S., & Moore, R. (2007) · Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms · doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2007.01.220 · Cited by 44
Late Neanderthals at Jarama VI (central Iberia)?
Kehl, M., Burow, C., Hilgers, A., et al. (2013) · Quaternary Research · doi:10.1016/j.yqres.2013.06.010 · Cited by 44
“Recent improvements in the pretreatment of radiocarbon samples (Bird et al., 1999; Higham, 2011) mean Neanderthal occupations dated with the routine ABA protocol often increase in age when redated using new techniques such as ABOx-SC of charcoal or ultrafiltration of bone collagen (Higham, 2011).”
MethodHunt, C. O., Gilbertson, D. D., Hill, E. A., & Simpson, D. J. W. (2015) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2015.02.030 · Cited by 44
“Innovations including the now almost-universal Accelerator Mass 116 Spectrometry, the ABOX stepped-combustion technique for charcoal (Bird et al. 1999), the 117 ultrafiltration technique for bone (Higham et al. 2006) and dating the bone-specific amino acid 118 hydroxyproline (Marom et al. 2013)…”
MethodWiedemeier, D. B., Lang, S. Q., Gierga, M., Abiven, S., Bernasconi, S. M., Früh‐Green, G. L., Hajdas, I., Hanke, U. M., Hilf, M. D., McIntyre, C. P., et al. (2016) · Journal of Visualized Experiments · doi:10.3791/53922 · Cited by 56
Criteria for assessing the quality of Middle Pleistocene to Holocene vertebrate fossil ages
Rodríguez-Rey, M., Herrando-Pérez, S., Gillespie, R., Jacobs, Z., Saltré, F., Brook, B. W., Prideaux, G. J., Roberts, R. G., Cooper, A., Alroy, J., et al. (2015) · Quaternary Geochronology · doi:10.1016/j.quageo.2015.08.002 · Cited by 38
“To be ranked m, charcoal 133 had to be pre-treated to remove chemical contamination using strong oxidation reagents, such 134 as acid chlorate (Gillespie, 1997) and acid dichromate (ABOX, Bird et al., 1999).”
MethodSelf-citationBehavioral Variability in ABA Chemical Pretreatment Close to the 14C Age Limit
Santos, G. M., & Ormsby, K. M. (2013) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200057660 · Cited by 43
“Upon completing the chemical pretreatments (ABA and ABOX), the samples were rinsed with ultrapure Milli-Q™ lukewarm water to pH neutral, and dried at ~80 C before SC (Bird et al. 1999).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialStarkovich, B. M. (2011) · Quaternary International · doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2011.10.019 · Cited by 41
Evaluation of Preparation Methods in Radiocarbon Dating of Old Wood
Hajdas, I., Hendriks, L., Fontana, A., & Monegato, G. (2016) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/rdc.2016.98 · Cited by 41
“The ABOX procedure developed by Bird et al. (1999) is an alternative to the conventional ABA treatment when pretreating old material.”
MethodWedage, O., Roberts, P., Faulkner, P., Crowther, A., Douka, K., Picin, A., Blinkhorn, J., Deraniyagala, S. U., Boivin, N. L., Petraglia, M. D., et al. (2020) · Quaternary Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2020.106200 · Cited by 42
Index of Dates from Archaeological Sites in Queensland
Ulm, S., & Reid, J. (2000) · Queensland Archaeological Research · doi:10.25120/qar.12.2000.78 · Cited by 40
Behavioral Variability in ABA Chemical Pretreatment Close to the 14C Age Limit
Santos, G. M. (2013) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.2458/azu_js_rc.55.16102 · Cited by 39
Advances in accelerator mass spectrometry
Fifield, L. K. (2000) · Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms · doi:10.1016/s0168-583x(00)00229-9 · Cited by 39
Self-citationFifield, L. K. (2005) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/3-540-27095-7_37 · Cited by 39
Self-citationL’art aurignacien dans la décoration de la Grotte de Fumane
Broglio, A., Stefani, M. D., Gurioli, F., Pallecchi, P., Giachi, G., Higham, T., & Brock, F. (2009) · L Anthropologie · doi:10.1016/j.anthro.2009.09.016 · Cited by 37
Becerra‐Valdivia, L., Leal-Cervantes, R., Wood, R. E., & Higham, T. (2019) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2019.105043 · Cited by 37
Validity of radiocarbon ages of Siberian yedoma
Vasil'chuk, Y. K., & Vasil'chuk, A. C. (2017) · GeoResJ · doi:10.1016/j.grj.2017.02.004 · Cited by 37
Jacobs, Z. L., Li, B., Jankowski, N. R., et al. (2014) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2014.11.020 · Cited by 36
“Application of newgeneration pretreatment techniques, such as acid-base wet oxidation and stepped-combustion (ABOX-SC) procedures for charcoal (Bird et al., 1999), molecular ultrafiltration procedures for bone collagen (Higham et al., 2006) and X-ray diffraction and density separation procedures…”
BackgroundMethodInitial Upper Paleolithic: A (near) global problem and a global opportunity
Kuhn, S. L. (2018) · Archaeological Research in Asia · doi:10.1016/j.ara.2018.10.002 · Cited by 36
Effectiveness of different pre‐treatments in recovering pre‐burial isotopic ratios of charred plants
Brinkkemper, O., Braadbaart, F., van Os, B., et al. (2017) · Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry · doi:10.1002/rcm.8033 · Cited by 34
“[17]–[19] At this level of accuracy stable isotope analysis, for usual plant isotopic ratios, [10],[12] would provide measurements within typical measurement uncertainty for δ 13 C values (ca 0.”
David, B., Delannoy, J.-J., Mialanes, J., Clarkson, C., Petchey, F., Geneste, J.-M., Manne, T., Bird, M. I., Barker, B., Richards, T., et al. (2019) · Quaternary Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2019.04.027 · Cited by 26
Self-citationLoftus, E., Stewart, B. A., Dewar, G., & Lee‐Thorp, J. A. (2015) · Journal of Quaternary Science · doi:10.1002/jqs.2817 · Cited by 35
“This technique is considerably more rigorous than other pretreatment methods for charcoals and is more effective at removing contaminating carbon, particularly humic acids, and generally produces older dates than less rigorous pretreatment methods (Bird et al., 1999).”
BackgroundMethodIs there a Pleistocene archaeological site at Cuddie Springs?
Gillespie, R., & Brook, B. W. (2006) · Archaeology in Oceania/Archæology & physical anthropology in Oceania · doi:10.1002/j.1834-4453.2006.tb00600.x · Cited by 34
“Radiocarbon dating of charcoal is a standard method for age estimation in archaeological and other sites, and the results are reliable provided appropriate chemistry is performed on suitable material (eg. Gillespie, 1990, 1998, 2002; Bird et al., 1999; Fifield et al., 2001; Turney et al., 2001).”
BackgroundTephra studies and the reconstruction of Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic cultural trajectories
d’Errico, F., & Banks, W. E. (2014) · Quaternary Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2014.05.014 · Cited by 33
Yim, W. W. S., Hilgers, A., Huang, G., et al. (2007) · Quaternary International · doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2007.07.004 · Cited by 32
“The use of radiocarbon dating for such deposits is problematic not only because of the age limit of the method, but also because of the presence of old and new sources of carbon (Bird et al., 1999) and large variations of atmospheric radiocarbon concentration during the last glacial period (Beck et al.”
BackgroundBird, M. I., TURNEY, C. S. M., Fifield, L. K., et al. (2003) · Quaternary Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0277-3791(03)00151-3 · Cited by 32
Self-citationMiddle to Upper Paleolithic transition in Moravia: New sites, new dates, new ideas
Škrdla, P. (2016) · Quaternary International · doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2016.07.029 · Cited by 32
The Chronological Factor in Understanding the Middle and Upper Paleolithic of Eurasia
Douka, K., & Higham, T. (2017) · Current Anthropology · doi:10.1086/694173 · Cited by 32
“Charcoal samples may now be pretreated using rigorous acid-base oxidation followed by stepped combustion (ABOx-SC) methods (Bird et al. 1999; Wood et al. 2012 and references therein).”
MethodWard, I. A. K., Fullagar, R., Boer-Mah, T., et al. (2005) · Geoarchaeology · doi:10.1002/gea.20087 · Cited by 31
“Radiocarbon samples were prepared using acid-extraction methods detailed by Bird et al. (1999) and dated by AMS radiocarbon dating at Waikato and Australian Nuclear Science Technology Organization (ANSTO) laboratories.”
MethodRuíz, M. N., Benito‐Calvo, A., Alcalde, R. A., Alonso-García, P., Juez, H. D. L. F., Santamaría, M., Cabornero, C. S., Álvarez‐Vena, A., Arnold, L. J., Iriarte-Chiapusso, M. J., et al. (2021) · Quaternary Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2021.106795 · Cited by 31
TURNEY, C. S. M., Bird, M. I., Fifield, L. K., Kershaw, P., Cresswell, R. G., Santos, G. M., Tada, M., Hausladen, P. A., & Youping, Z. (2001) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200031611 · Cited by 30
Self-citationAccelerator mass spectrometry of long-lived light radionuclides
Jull, A. J. T., Burr, G. S., Beck, J., Hodgins, G. W. L., Biddulph, D. L., McHARGUE, L. R., & Lange, T. E. (2007) · Radioactivity in the environment · doi:10.1016/s1569-4860(07)11007-x · Cited by 32
Santos, G. M., & Xu, X. (2016) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/rdc.2016.43 · Cited by 28
David, B., Lee, A., Delannoy, J., Fresløv, J., Urwin, C., Petchey, F., McDowell, M. C., Mullett, R., Mialanes, J., Wood, R. E., et al. (2021) · Quaternary Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2020.106781 · Cited by 28
Self-citationTURNEY, C. S. M., Fifield, L. K., Palmer, J., Hogg, A. G., Baillie, M. G. L., Galbraith, R. F., Ogden, J., Lorrey, A. M., & Tims, S. G. (2007) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200042375 · Cited by 28
Self-citationHaesaerts, P., Damblon, F., Nigst, P. R., et al. (2013) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200057799 · Cited by 28
Loftus, E., Pargeter, J., Mackay, A., Stewart, B. A., & Mitchell, P. J. (2019) · Journal of Anthropological Archaeology · doi:10.1016/j.jaa.2019.101117 · Cited by 27
“This protocol is a modi fi ed procedure of the ABOx-SC protocol (Bird et al., 1999; Brock et al., 2010) that omits the base wash and is being developed for dating old and fragile charcoal samples (Douka et al. in prep.)”
MethodJankowski, N. R., Gully, G. A., Jacobs, Z. L., et al. (2016) · Journal of Quaternary Science · doi:10.1002/jqs.2877 · Cited by 27
“Infinite 14C ages will also be obtained for samples that lie close to or beyond the 50-ka limit of the radiocarbon technique (Roberts et al., 1994; Bird et al., 1999; Turney et al., 2001; Reimer et al., 2013), which includes the vast majority of the Australian megafauna.”
BackgroundCullen, V. L., Smith, V., Tushabramishvili, N., Mallol, C., Dee, M., Wilkinson, K., & Adler, D. S. (2020) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2020.102908 · Cited by 28
“It has been shown (Bird et al., 1999; Wood et al., 2012) that ABOx is the most reliable procedure for preparing charcoal samples > 30 ka, but as the technique was not then available, the previous charcoal dates of Adler et al. (2008) for layer 4c are likely to be erroneous and are therefore…”
MethodDykes, A. P. (2007) · Landslides · doi:10.1007/s10346-006-0077-5 · Cited by 26
“The mudflow deposit has been radiocarbon dated by Bird using the ABOX-SC method of Bird et al. (1999) .”
MethodNew chronological data for Weichselian sites from Poland and their implications for Palaeolithic
Bobak, D., Płonka, T., Połtowicz-Bobak, M., & Wiśniewski, A. (2012) · Quaternary International · doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2012.12.001 · Cited by 26
Shang, S., Fan, D., Yin, P., Burr, G. S., Zhang, M., & Wang, Q. (2017) · Palaeogeography Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology · doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2017.12.012 · Cited by 26
Higham, T., Frouin, M., Douka, K., Ronchitelli, A., Boscato, P., Benazzi, S., Crezzini, J., Spagnolo, V., McCarty, M., Marciani, G., et al. (2024) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-51546-9 · Cited by 27
“Charcoal was chemically pretreated using a variation of the usual acid-base-wet oxidation/stepped combustion (ABOx-SC) protocol we employ for dating ancient Palaeolithic charcoal 80,81 .”
Mayr, C., Stojakowits, P., Lempe, B., Blaauw, M., Diersche, V., Grohganz, M., Correa, M. L., Ohlendorf, C., Reimer, P. J., & Bernd Zolitschka, A. (2019) · Quaternary Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2019.06.013 · Cited by 25
RADIOCARBON DATING | Plant Macrofossils
Hatté, C., & Jull, A. J. T. (2007) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b0-44-452747-8/00047-8 · Cited by 25
Development of an Automated System for Preparation of organic samples
Christine, H. Y., Poupeau, J.-J., Tannau, J.-F., & Paterne, M. (2003) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200032781 · Cited by 22
“Consequently, at this stage of the development, it does not seem necessary to implement a room with double walls around the Cajon connection, as proposed by Bird et al. (1999).”
BackgroundMethodExtensive glaciation in Transbaikalia, Siberia, at the Last Glacial Maximum
Margold, M., Jansen, J. D., Гуринов, А., et al. (2015) · Quaternary Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2015.11.018 · Cited by 24
“Nonetheless, given that we have just one date in favour of an LGM ice cap capable of supporting a Vitim valley glacier beyond Bodaybo, and that this date conflicts with the existing 14C dates from the area (albeit via potentially unreliable 14C measurements on bone; e.g., Stafford et al., 1987; Bird et al., 1999), we…”
BackgroundAge constraints on Pleistocene megafauna at Tight Entrance Cave in southwestern Australia
Ayliffe, L. K., Prideaux, G. J., Bird, M. I., et al. (2008) · Quaternary Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2008.07.008 · Cited by 24
Self-citationRoberts, R. G., Morwood, M. J., & Westaway, K. (2005) · Asian perspectives · doi:10.1353/asi.2005.0028 · Cited by 24
“But preparation of charcoal samples using the new roberts et al. . illuminating southeast asian prehistory 295 acid-base wet oxidation and stepped-combustion (ABOX-SC) technique permits 14C dating back to 55,000 years (Bird et al. 1999).”
MethodHaesaerts, P. (2013) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.2458/azu_js_rc.55.16344 · Cited by 23
Loss and gain of carbon during char degradation
Bird, M. I., McBeath, A. V., Ascough, P. L., Levchenko, V. A., Wurster, C. M., Munksgaard, N. C., Smernik, R. J., & Williams, A. (2016) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2016.12.012 · Cited by 24
“This conclusion is consistent with other studies 402 that have shown comparatively rapid loss of char produced at relatively low temperatures on annual 403 to decadal timescales (Bird et al. 1999; Knicker et al., 2013; Sagrilo et al., 2015).”
InfluentialSelf-citationPatyniak, M., Landgraf, A., Dzhumabaeva, A., et al. (2017) · Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America · doi:10.1785/0120170083 · Cited by 23
Michczyńska, D. J., Krąpiec, M., Michczyński, A., Pawlyta, J., Goślar, T., Nawrocka, N., Piotrowska, N., Szychowska‐Kra̧piec, E., Waliszewska, B., & Zborowska, M. (2018) · Quaternary Geochronology · doi:10.1016/j.quageo.2018.07.013 · Cited by 23
Bird, M. I. (2013) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-444-53643-3.00047-9 · Cited by 23
Self-citationAssessment of oxygen plasma ashing as a pre-treatment for radiocarbon dating
Bird, M. I., Charville-Mort, P. D. J., Ascough, P. L., Wood, R. E., Higham, T., & Apperley, D. C. (2009) · Quaternary Geochronology · doi:10.1016/j.quageo.2009.10.004 · Cited by 22
“…recently, the ABOx-SC (acid-base-oxidation with stepped combustion) has been shown, in some circumstances, to provide more reliable contaminant removal from charcoal, enabling robust dating of charcoal as old as 55 ka BP (Bird et al., 1999, 2003; Turney et al., 2001; Brock and Higham, in press).”
Self-citationPleistocene Migration and Colonization in the Indo-Pacific region
O’Connor, S. (2010) · ANU Open Research (Australian National University) · Cited by 21
Wilkins, J., Schoville, B. J., Brown, K. S., Gliganic, L. A., Meyer, M. C., Loftus, E., Pickering, R., Collins, B., Blackwood, A. F., Makalima, S., et al. (2020) · Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology · doi:10.1007/s41982-020-00050-9 · Cited by 23
A chronological model for the Late Paleolithic at Shuidonggou Locality 2, North China
Peng, F., Lin, S. C. H., Patania, I., Levchenko, V. A., Guo, J., Wang, H., & Gao, X. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0232682 · Cited by 22
New Abox Ams-14C Ages Remove Dating Anomalies At Puritjarra Rock Shelter
Smith, M. A., Bird, M. I., TURNEY, C. S. M., et al. (2001) · Australian Archaeology · doi:10.1080/03122417.2001.11681724 · Cited by 21
Self-citationKehl, M., Alonso, D. Á., Herrero, M. D. A., Herrero, A. D., Klasen, N., Rethemeyer, J., & Weniger, G. (2018) · Quaternary Research · doi:10.1017/qua.2018.13 · Cited by 22
Radiocarbon and OSL dating on cores from the Chaoshan delta in the coastal South China Sea
Zhong, J., Ling, K., Yang, M., et al. (2022) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2022.1030841 · Cited by 20
Richter, D., Moser, J., & Nami, M. (2012) · Vertebrate paleobiology and paleoanthroplogy series/Vertebrate paleobiology and paleoanthropology series · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-2929-2_5 · Cited by 20
Second Radiocarbon Intercomparison Program for the Chauvetpont d'Arc Cave, Ardèche, France
Quiles, A., Valladas, H., Geneste, J.-M., Clottes, J., Baffler, D., Berthier, B., Brock, F., Ramsey, C. B., Delqué-Količ, E., Dumoulin, J.-P., et al. (2014) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.2458/56.16940 · Cited by 20
“The ETH, ORAU, and LSCE laboratories also tested the more aggressive ABOX pretreatment (Bird et al. 1999; Brock et al. 2010; Hajdas et al. 2007), using potassium dichromate in sulfuric acid without precombustion for ETH, and with a 300°C and”
MethodRichter, J., Litt, T., Lehmkuhl, F., et al. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0239968 · Cited by 20
“Due to limited sample volumes at Al-Ansab 1, the Acid-Base-Oxidation (ABOx) protocol, which has occasionally delivered older dates than competitive protocols [44, 45], was not applied because ABOx would have enhanced the risk of sample volumes loss of Al-Ansab 1 that in turn may have increased dating uncertainties (fo…”
MethodNejman, L., Wood, R. E., Wright, D., Lisá, L., Nerudová, Z., Neruda, P., Přichystal, A., & Svoboda, J. A. (2017) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2017.03.015 · Cited by 19
SAMPLE PREPARATION METHODS USED AT THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY RADIOCARBON FACILITY
Wood, R. E., Esmay, R., Usher, E., et al. (2023) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/rdc.2022.97 · Cited by 17
“Where different, remaining samples are treated with ABOx-SC.”
BackgroundInfluentialLow-altitude periglacial activity in southeastern Australia during the late Pleistocene
Barrows, T. T., Mills, S., Fitzsimmons, K. E., Wasson, R. J., & GALLOWAY, R. W. (2021) · Quaternary Research · doi:10.1017/qua.2021.72 · Cited by 16
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Bird, M. I., Ayliffe, L. K., Fifield, L. K., Turney, C. S. M., Cresswell, R. G., Barrows, T. T., & David, B.
- Affiliations
- Australian National University (AU)
- Venue
- Radiocarbon
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1999
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 127-140
- ISSN
- 0033-8222 (ISSN-L)
- 1945-5755
- OpenAlex
- W1955935479
- Semantic Scholar
- 0b86b4d2ded1bc772aa8185d1d86f9fc14c36f78
- Cited by
- 315
- References
- 16
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 41.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Radiocarbon (publishedVersion)
- UA Campus Repository (The University of Arizona) (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Australian Research Council
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Archeology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Geology and Paleoclimatology Research
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geochemistry and Petrology › Geological and Geochemical Analysis
- Keywords
- charcoal dating, graphitization, pollutant removal
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-27, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-27 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
