Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-10T21:06:36.987Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Status Report of the New AMS 14C Sample Preparation Lab of the Hertelendi Laboratory of Environmental Studies (Debrecen, Hungary)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 February 2016

M Molnár ,
R Janovics ,
I Major ,
J Orsovszki ,
R Gönczi ,
M Veres ,
A G Leonard ,
S M Castle ,
T E Lange  and
L Wacker
...Show all authors
M Molnár*
Affiliation:
Institute of Nuclear Research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (ATOMKI), Debrecen, Hungary
R Janovics
Affiliation:
Institute of Nuclear Research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (ATOMKI), Debrecen, Hungary Isotoptech Zrt, Debrecen, Hungary
I Major
Affiliation:
Institute of Nuclear Research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (ATOMKI), Debrecen, Hungary Isotoptech Zrt, Debrecen, Hungary
J Orsovszki
Affiliation:
Isotoptech Zrt, Debrecen, Hungary
R Gönczi
Affiliation:
Institute of Nuclear Research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (ATOMKI), Debrecen, Hungary
M Veres
Affiliation:
Isotoptech Zrt, Debrecen, Hungary
A G Leonard
Affiliation:
NSF Arizona AMS Laboratory, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
S M Castle
Affiliation:
NSF Arizona AMS Laboratory, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
T E Lange
Affiliation:
NSF Arizona AMS Laboratory, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
L Wacker
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Ion Beam Physics, ETHZ, Zürich, Switzerland
I Hajdas
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Ion Beam Physics, ETHZ, Zürich, Switzerland
A J T Jull
Affiliation:
Institute of Nuclear Research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (ATOMKI), Debrecen, Hungary NSF Arizona AMS Laboratory, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
*
2Corresponding author. Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We document chemical laboratory procedures and results on international comparison samples at the Hertelendi Laboratory of Environmental Studies, Debrecen, Hungary. We also show results using the new MICADAS system and compare these results to internationally recognized standards and blank materials. The newly developed sample preparation system in HEKAL can handle samples as 1) organic material, 2) cellulose fraction of plant, 3) bones, 4) carbonate and shell, and 5) dissolved inorganic carbon of groundwater. The results of radiocarbon measurements on intercomparison samples confirm the reliability of the sample preparation system at HEKAL Lab and also the good performance of the MICADAS 14C system. The blank levels for each type of sample of 1 mg C carbon content are well reproducible, ∼0.3–0.5 pMC.

Type
Articles
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 55 , Issue 2: Proceedings of the 21st International Radiocarbon Conference (Part 1 of 2) , 2013 , pp. 665 - 676
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

Access options

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

References

Bronk Ramsey, C, Higham, TFG, Bowles, A, Hedges, REM. 2004. Improvements to the pretreatment of bone at Oxford. Radiocarbon 46(1): 155–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burr, GS, Thomas, JM, Reines, D, Jeffrey, D, Courtney, C, Jull, AJT, Lange, T. 2001. Sample preparation of dissolved organic carbon in groundwater for AMS 14C analysis. Radiocarbon 43(2A): 183–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hajdas, I, Bonani, G, Thut, H, Leone, G, Pfenninger, R, Maden, C. 2004. A report on sample preparation at the ETH/PSI AMS facility in Zurich. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 223–224:267–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jull, AJT, Burr, GS, Beck, JW, Hodgins, GWL, Biddulph, DL, Gann, J, Hatheway, AL, Lange, TE, Lifton, NA. 2006. Application of accelerator mass spectrometry to environmental and paleoclimate studies at the University of Arizona. Radioactivity in the Environment 8:3–23.Google Scholar
Leonard, A, Castle, S, Burr, GS, Lange, T, Thomas, J. 2013. A wet oxidation method for AMS radiocarbon analysis of dissolved organic carbon in water. Radiocarbon, these proceedings, doi:10.2458/azu_js_rc.55.16277.Google Scholar
Molnár, M, Rinyu, L, Veres, M, Seiler, M, Wacker, L, Synal, H-A. 2013. EnvironMICADAS: a mini 14C-AMS with enhanced gas ion source interface in the Hertelendi Laboratory of Environmental Studies (HEKAL), Hungary. 2013. Radiocarbon, these proceedings, doi: 10.2458/azu_js_rc.55.16331.Google Scholar
Nemeč, M, Wacker, L, Hajdas, I, Gäggeler, H. 2010. Alternative methods for cellulose preparation for AMS measurement. Radiocarbon 52(2–3): 1358–70.Google Scholar
Olson, EA, Broecker, WS. 1961. Lamont natural radiocarbon measurements VII. Radiocarbon 3:141–75.Google Scholar
Rinyu, L, Molnár, M, Major, I, Nagy, T, Veres, M, Kimák, Á, Wacker, L, Synal, H-A. 2013. Optimization of sealed tube graphitization method for environmental 14C studies using MICADAS. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 294:270–5.Google Scholar
Stafford, TW Jr, Hare, PE, Currie, L, Jull, AJT, Donahue, DJ. 1991. Accelerator radiocarbon dating at the molecular level. Journal of Archaelogical Science 18(1): 35–72.Google Scholar
Stafford, TW, 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(8):2257–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tripp, JA, McCullagh, JSO, Hedges, REM. 2006. Preparative separation of underivatized amino acids for compound-specific stable isotope analysis and radiocarbon dating of hydrolyzed bone collage. Journal of Separation Science 29(1):41–8.Google Scholar
van Klinken, G. 1999. Bone quality indicators for paleodietary and radiocarbon measurements. Journal of Archaeological Science 26(6): 687–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Klinken, GJ, Hedges, REM. 1995. Experiments on collagen-humic interactions: speed of humic uptake, and effects of diverse chemical treatments. Journal of Archaeological Science 22(2):263–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar