Finding fossils in Malapa breccia – medical CT scanning or micro-CT scanning?

Abstract

Computed tomography (CT) imaging of fossils has revolutionised the field of palaeontology, allowing researchers to gain a better understanding of fossil anatomy, preservation and conservation. Micro focus X-ray computed tomography (μXCT) has been far more extensively used for these purposes than medical CT (XCT) – mostly because of the exquisite detail that the μXCT scanning modality, using slices of micron thicknesses, can produce. High energy X-rays can potentially penetrate breccia more effectively than lower energy beams. This study demonstrates that lower energy beams produce superior images for prioritising breccia for preparation. Additionally, XCT scanners are numerous, accessible, fast and relatively cost-effective when compared to μXCT scanners – the latter are not freely available, scanning times are much longer and there are significant limitations on the size and weight of scannable objects. Breccia blocks from Malapa were scanned at high and lower energy and images were analysed for image quality, artifact and certainty of diagnosis. Results show that lower energy images are deemed superior to higher energy images for this particular application. This finding, taken together with the limitations associated with the use of μXCT for the imaging of the large breccia from Malapa, shows that XCT is the better modality for this specific application. The ability to choose fossil-bearing breccia, ahead of manual mechanical preparation by laboratory technicians, would allow for the optimal use of limited resources, manual preparatory skills as well as the curtailment of costs.

Investigating the dentoalveolar complex in archaeological human skull specimens: Additional findings with large volume micro‐CT compared to standard methods

“…The “large volume” micro‐computed tomography (LV micro‐CT) scanner has the potential to provide high‐resolution datasets of all structures scanned and can accommodate larger specimens such as a human skull. Other types of CT scanners such as the cone‐beam CT (CBCT) scanner (Anderson et al, 2014; Lozano et al, 2022) and/or medical CT scanner (Anderson et al, 2014; Smilg, 2017) could also accommodate such samples and have been used in many investigations. However, an important distinction between the LV micro‐CT scanner and these CT systems is the thickness of the scan slices.…”

Hidden treasures uncovered: successful detection of fossils below the surface in large limestone blocks using a standard medical X-ray CT scanner

“…In contrast, medical X-ray CT scanners are much more widespread and with greater availability. The operative costs are comparatively low (maintenance costs of the equipment usually being covered by the medical facility to which it belongs), and the machines are designed to scan human-sized objects (Smilg 2017). Unfortunately, distribution of medical and laboratory X-ray CT systems, their availability or cost are rarely discussed in the literature (however see Cunningham et al 2014).…”