A new procedure for extraction of collagen from modern and archaeological bones for 14C dating

  • F. Maspero
  • S. Sala
  • M. E. Fedi
  • M. Martini
  • A. Papagni
Technical Note

Abstract

Bones are potentially the best age indicators in a stratigraphic study, because they are closely related to the layer in which they are found. Collagen is the most suitable fraction and is the material normally used in radiocarbon dating. Bone contaminants can strongly alter the carbon isotopic fraction values of the samples, so chemical pretreatment for 14 C dating by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) is essential. The most widespread method for collagen extraction is based on the Longin procedure, which consists in HCl demineralization to dissolve the inorganic phase of the samples, followed by dissolution of collagen in a weak acid solution. In this work the possible side effects of this procedure on a modern bone are presented; the extracted collagen was analyzed by ATR-IR spectroscopy. An alternative procedure, based on use of HF instead of HCl, to minimize unwanted degradation of the organic fraction, is also given. A study by ATR-IR spectroscopic analysis of collagen collected after different demineralization times and with different acid volumes, and a study of an archaeological sample, are also presented.

Keywords

Radiocarbon Archaeometry Biological samples Bones Collagen 

References

  1. 1.
    Hedges REM, Vanklinken GJ (1992) A review of current approaches in the pretreatment of bone for radiocarbon dating by AMS. Radiocarbon 34(3):279–291Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hedges REM (2002) Bone diagenesis: an overview of processes. Archaeometry 44(3):319–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brock F et al (2010) Pre-screening techniques for identification of samples suitable for radiocarbon dating of poorly preserved bones. J Archaeol Sci 37:855–865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Longin R (1971) New method of collagen extraction for radiocarbon dating. Nature 230:241–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Minami M et al (2004) Chemical techniques to extract organic fractions from fossil bones for accurate 14 C dating. Nucl Instrum Meth B 223–224:302–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yizhaq M et al (2005) Quality controlled radiocarbon dating of bones and charcoal from the early Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) of Motza (Israel). Radiocarbon 47(2):193–206Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yuan SX et al (2000) Comparison of different bone pretreatment methods for AMS C-14 dating. Nucl Instrum Meth B 172:424–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huls CM et al (2008) Ultrafiltration: boon or bane? Radiocarbon 51(2):613–625Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Semal P, Orban R (1995) Collagen extraction from recent and fossil bones: quantitative and qualitative aspects. J Archaeol Sci 22(4):463–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gallop PM, Seifter S (1963) Preparation and properties of soluble collagens. Meth Enzymol 6:635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Klinken GJ (1999) Bone collagen quality indicators for palaeodietary and radiocarbon measurements. J Archaeol Sci 26(6):687–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beer M et al (1959) Infra-red spectra and structure of proteins. Proc R Soc Lond A 249(1):147–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Deniro MJ, Weiner S (1988) Chemical, enzymatic and spectroscopic characterization of collagen and other organic fractions from prehistoric bones. Geochim Cosmochim Ac 52(9):2197–2206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Marcheselli G, et al. (2008) The Amphitheatre in Dürres (Albania): a contribution to the chronology of the medieval settlement using luminescence and radiocarbon dating, Int. Congress of Archeometry, poster sessionGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Reimer PJ et al (2009) IntCal09 and Marine09 radiocarbon age calibration curves, 0–50000 years cal BP. Radiocarbon 51(4):1111–1150Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bronk RC (2009) Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon dates. Radiocarbon 51(1):337–360Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. Maspero
    • 1
  • S. Sala
    • 2
  • M. E. Fedi
    • 3
  • M. Martini
    • 1
    • 2
    • 4
  • A. Papagni
    • 2
  1. 1.CUDaM, University of Milano BicoccaMilanoItaly
  2. 2.Materials Science DepartmentUniversity of Milano BicoccaMilanoItaly
  3. 3.INFN sezione di FirenzeSesto Fiorentino (Firenze)Italy
  4. 4.INFN sezione di Milano BicoccaMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations