Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-54qdv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T18:45:03.850Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

AMS Dating Mammoth Bones: Comparison with Conventional Dating

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

Yurij K Vasil'chuk*
Affiliation:
Geology and Geography Department, Lomonosov's Moscow University, Vorob'yovy Hills, 118899, Moscow, Russia
Alla C Vasil'chuk
Affiliation:
Geology and Geography Department, Lomonosov's Moscow University, Vorob'yovy Hills, 118899, Moscow, Russia
Austin Long
Affiliation:
Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Gould-Simpson 208, Tucson, Arizona 85721-0077, USA
A J T Jull
Affiliation:
NSF-Arizona AMS Laboratory, University of Arizona, 1118 East Fourth Street, Tucson, Arizona 85721-0081, USA
D J Donahue
Affiliation:
NSF-Arizona AMS Laboratory, University of Arizona, 1118 East Fourth Street, Tucson, Arizona 85721-0081, USA
*
Corresponding author. Email: vasilch@orc.ru.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

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

Fossilized Siberian mammoth remains are important indicators of environmental change in the Late Pleistocene. The NSF-Arizona AMS Laboratory radiocarbon results on amino acid separations compare well with mammoth bone collagen from the same specimens treated by HCl and dated by beta counting (the Russian Academy Geological Institute Radiocarbon Laboratory). Neither laboratory was aware of the other's dates for these comparisons. The results coincide very closely (a difference of 50–800 yr), and demonstrate that AMS dating provides a very good perspective for applications of past mammoth population studies.

Information

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona