Can We Get a Good Radiocarbon Age from “Bad Bone”? Determining the Reliability of Radiocarbon Age from Bioapatite
Open accessAbstract
The study of the radiocarbon age of bone bioapatite was initiated by necessity to date archaeological artifacts, which often contain little or no collagen as a result of poor preservation. Contamination of the organic fraction in the process of the burial or during museum preservation treatment generally prohibits the use of the collagen fraction for dating. Our investigation has shown that the pretreatment of bone with diluted acetic acid following a proscribed technique allows the separation of the bioapatite fraction from diagenetic carbonates. We have successfully used this technique to prepare and date samples of bone and of tooth enamel and dentin, with varying degrees of preservation condition, and from time intervals ranging from a few hundred 14 C yr to greater than 40,000 14 C yr.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Since collagen holds over 95% of the nitrogen in bones, the nitrogen data suggest the presence of a significant amount of collagen in the Canadian dinosaur bones.
“Since collagen holds over 95% of the nitrogen in bones [25], this suggests the presence of a significant amount of collagen in the Canadian dinosaur bones.”
From The Search for Solutions to Mysterious Anomalies in the Geologic Column (2019) · cites this paper as [25]
Cites
The survival of organic matter in bone: a review
Collins, M. J., Nielsen–Marsh, C. M., Hiller, J., Smith, C. I., Roberts, J. P., Prigodich, R. V., Wess, T. J., Csapò, J., Millard, A. R., & Turner–Walker, G. (2002) · Archaeometry · doi:10.1111/1475-4754.t01-1-00071 · Cited by 615 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Recent publications show that such problems still exist and suggest that they are caused by both the poor preservation of collagen and the difficulties in removing contaminants from the bone extracts used for dating (Koch et al. 1997; Collins et al. 2002; Ambrose and Krigbaum 2003).”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Search for Solutions to Mysterious Anomalies in the Geologic Column
(2019) · Geology, Earth & Marine Sciences · doi:10.31038/gems.2019114 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Radiocarbon in Dinosaur Bones Revisited
Senter, P. J. (2022) · The American Biology Teacher · doi:10.1525/abt.2022.84.6.336 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Cherkinsky, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Georgia (US)
- Corresponding author
- Cherkinsky, Alexander
- Venue
- Radiocarbon
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2009
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 647-655
- ISSN
- 0033-8222 (ISSN-L)
- 1945-5755
- OpenAlex
- W2125645243
- Cited by
- 117
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 1.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Radiocarbon (publishedVersion)
- UA Campus Repository (The University of Arizona) (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Cultural Heritage Materials Analysis
- Keywords
- bioapatite, radiocarbon dating of bone, acetic acid pretreatment, diagenetic carbonates, dental enamel, dentin, collagen loss, sample preparation, archaeological finds
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.
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
