Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T21:27:08.625Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Testing the “Dicarb Problem”: A Case Study from North Alaska

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

Joshua D Reuther  and
S Craig Gerlach
Joshua D Reuther*
Affiliation:
Northern Land Use Research, Inc., 600 University Ave., Suite 6, Fairbanks, Alaska 99708, USA
S Craig Gerlach
Affiliation:
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Department of Anthropology, P.O. Box 757720, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska 99775-7720, USA
*
Corresponding author. Email: josh_reuther@yahoo.com.
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.

An assumption exists in North Alaskan archaeological literature that radiometric assays produced by the now-defunct Dicarb Radioisotope Co. (Dicarb) are “too young” or more recent when compared to those produced by other laboratories. This assumption is statistically tested by comparing radiocarbon assays produced by Dicarb to those produced by Beta Analytic, Inc.; Geochron Laboratories; and the NSF-Arizona AMS Facility. The primary data set consists of radiometric and accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) assays produced from materials excavated at the Croxton site, Locality J, Tukuto Lake, northern Alaska. Statistical analyses demonstrate that 14C assays produced by Dicarb tend to be “younger” than assays produced by other laboratories on crosscheck samples, with differences ranging between 350 and 1440 yr.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 47 , Issue 3 , 2005 , pp. 359 - 366
Copyright
Copyright © 2005 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

References

Anderson, DD. 1968. A Stone Age campsite at the gateway to America. Scientific American 218(6):24–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, DD. 1978. Western Arctic and Subarctic. In: Taylor, RE, Meighan, CW, editors. Chronologies in New World Archaeology. New York: Academic Press. p 29–50.Google Scholar
Anderson, DD. 1980. Continuity and change in the prehistoric record from North Alaska. In: Kotani, Y, Workman, WB. Alaska Native Culture and History. Senri Ethnological Studies 4. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology. p 233–51.Google Scholar
Anderson, DD. 1984. Prehistory of North Alaska. In: Damas, D, editor. Arctic. Handbook of North American Indians , Vol. 5, Sturvtevant, WC, general editor. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. p 80–93.Google Scholar
Anderson, DD. 1988. Onion Portage: the archaeology of a stratified site from the Kobuk River, northwest Alaska. Anthropological Papers of the University of Alaska 22(1–2):1–163.Google Scholar
Carrigan, KD. 1999. The Croxton site: analysis of lithic tools and debitage [unpublished Master's research project on file]. Fairbanks: Department of Anthropology, University of Alaska, Fairbanks.Google Scholar
Dumond, DE. 1980. A chronology of native Alaskan subsistence systems. In: Kotani, Y, Workman, WB. Alaska Native Culture and History. Senri Ethnological Studies 4. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology. p 23–47.Google Scholar
Dumond, DE. 1982. Trends and traditions in Alaskan prehistory: the place of Norton culture. Arctic Anthropology 19(2):39–51.Google Scholar
Dumond, DE. 1987. The Eskimos and Aleuts. London: Thames and Hudson. 180 p.Google Scholar
Dumond, DE. 2000. The Norton tradition. Arctic Anthropology 37(2):1–22.Google Scholar
Gal, R. 1982a. Archaeological sites in the vicinity of the South Meade test well. Anthropological Papers of the University of Alaska 20(1–2):51–9.Google Scholar
Gal, R. 1982b. Appendix I. An annotated and indexed roster of archaeological radiocarbon dates from Alaska, north of 68∘ latitude. Anthropological Papers of the University of Alaska 20(1–2):159–80.Google Scholar
Gerlach, SC. 1989. Models of caribou exploitation, butchery and processing at the Croxton site, Tukuto Lake, Alaska [PhD dissertation]. Providence: Department of Anthropology, Brown University. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.Google Scholar
Gerlach, SC, Hall, ES Jr. 1988. The later prehistory of northern Alaska: the view from Tukuto Lake. In: Shaw, RD, Harrit, RK, Dumond, DE, editors. The Late Prehistoric Development of Alaska's Native People. Aurora Monograph Series No. 4. Anchorage: Alaska Anthropological Association. p 107–35.Google Scholar
Gerlach, SC, Mason, OK. 1992. Calibrated radiocarbon dates and cultural interaction in the western Arctic. Arctic Anthropology 29(1):54–81.Google Scholar
Giddings, JL. 1951. The Denbigh flint complex. American Antiquity 16(3):193–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giddings, JL. 1964. The Archaeology of Cape Denbigh. Providence: Brown University Press. 331p.Google Scholar
Harritt, RK. 1998. Paleo-Eskimo beginnings in North America: a new discovery at Kuzitrin Lake, Alaska. Etudes/Inuit/Studies 22(1):61–81.Google Scholar
Irving, WN. 1962. A provisional comparison of some Alaskan and Asian stone industries. In: Campbell, JM, editor. Prehistoric Cultural Relations Between the Arctic and Temperate Zones of North America. Montreal: Arctic Institute of North America, Technical Paper No. 11. p 55–68.Google Scholar
Irving, WN. 1964. Punyik Point and the Arctic small tool tradition [PhD dissertation]. Madison: Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Kunz, ML. 1977. Mosquito Lake site (PSM-049). In: Cook, JP, editor. Pipeline Archaeology. Fairbanks: Institute of Arctic Biology, University of Alaska, Fairbanks. p 747–982.Google Scholar
Kunz, ML, Reanier, RE. 1995. The Mesa site: a paleoindian hunting lookout in arctic Alaska. Arctic Anthropology 32(1):5–30.Google Scholar
Larsen, H. 2001. Deering–A Men's House from Seward Peninsula, Alaska. Publications of the National Museum, Ethnological Series, Vol. 19. Copenhagen: Department of Ethnography and SILA-the Greenland Research Centre, National Museum of Denmark.Google Scholar
Larsen, H, Rainey, F. 1948. Ipiutak and the Arctic whale hunting culture. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History 42:1–276.Google Scholar
Mason, OK. 1998. The contest between Ipiutak, Old Bering Sea, and Birnirk polities and the origin of whaling during the first millennium AD along the Bering Strait. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 17:240–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, OK. 2000. Archaeological Rorschach in delineating Ipiutak, Punuk and Birnirk in NW Alaska: masters, slaves or partners in trade? In: Applet, M, Berglund, J, Gullov, HC, editors. Identities and Cultural Contacts in the Arctic: Proceedings from a Conference at the Danish National Museum, Copenhagen. Copenhagen: The Danish National Museum and Danish Polar Centre. p 229–51.Google Scholar
Mason, OK, Gerlach, SC. 1995. Chukchi hotspots, paleopolynyas, and caribou crashes: climatic and ecological dimensions of North Alaska prehistory. Arctic Anthropology 32(1):101–30.Google Scholar
Minc, L, Smith, KP. 1989. The spirit of survival: cultural responses to resource variability in North Alaska. In: Halstead, P, O'Shea, J, editors. Bad Year Economics: Cultural Responses to Risk and Uncertainty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p 8–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oswald, WW, Brubaker, LB, Anderson, PM, Gerlach, SC. 2001. Late Holocene environmental and cultural changes at Tukuto Lake, northwestern Alaska. In: Gerlach, SC, Murray, MS, editors. People and Wildlife in Northern North America: Essays in Honor of R Dale Guthrie. BAR International Series 944. Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
Reanier, RE. 1992. Refinements to K-means clustering: spatial analysis of the Bateman site, arctic Alaska [PhD dissertation]. Seattle: Department of Anthropology, University of Washington.Google Scholar
Shott, MJ. 1992. Radiocarbon dating as a probabilistic technique: the Childer's site and Late Woodland occupation in the Ohio Valley. American Antiquity 57(2):202–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spaulding, AC. 1958. The significance of differences between radiocarbon dates. American Antiquity 23(3):309–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stuiver, M, Reimer, PJ. 1993. Extended 14C database and revised CALIB radiocarbon calibration program. Radiocarbon 35(1):215–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stuiver, M, Reimer, PJ, Bard, E, Beck, JW, Burr, GS, Hughen, KA, Kromer, B, McCormac, FG, van der Plicht, J, Spurk, M. 1998. IntCal98 radiocarbon age calibration, 24,000–0 cal BP. Radiocarbon 40(3):1041–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, DT. 1986. Refiguring Anthropology: First Principles of Probability and Statistics. Prospect Heights, Illinois: Waveland Press. 532 p.Google Scholar
Ward, GK, Wilson, SR. 1978. Procedures for comparing and combining radiocarbon age determinations: a critique. Archaeometry 20(1):19–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar