2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2006.11.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Using foraminifera to distinguish between natural and cultural shell deposits in coastal eastern Australia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
21
0
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
1
21
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…While this is not an ideal sample size for testing archaeological sediments (Rosendahl et al, 2007(Rosendahl et al, , p. 1586), 1 g is considered suitable for testing geological sediments or samples to have a known foraminiferal content (Gill et al, 1991).…”
Section: Re-analysis Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…While this is not an ideal sample size for testing archaeological sediments (Rosendahl et al, 2007(Rosendahl et al, , p. 1586), 1 g is considered suitable for testing geological sediments or samples to have a known foraminiferal content (Gill et al, 1991).…”
Section: Re-analysis Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This density is well within the parameters described for a naturally deposited assemblage, viz. >1000 foraminifera per 100 g of sediment (see Rosendahl et al, 2007Rosendahl et al, , 2014b. Five foraminifera taxa were identified, dominated by Elphidium sp.…”
Section: Re-analysis Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…During the past few decades, archaeologists have realized that the spatial distribution of surface and subsurface cultural materials can change over time and space by both anthropogenic and natural impacts (Grave & Kealhofer, 1999;Rosendahl, Ulm, & Weisler, 2007;Wood & Johnson, 1978). A new approach to recognizing postdepositional disturbances, proposed here, is the high-precision 230 Th dating of corals found in cultural layers at Pacific archaeological sites.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since a magnetic field is being created for each measurement, the instrument was zeroed between each reading to calculate magnetic susceptibility. Following methods outlined in Rosendahl et al (2007), foraminiferal analysis was carried out on sediments from selected XUs within each stratigraphic unit to assess the integrity of deposits. A 10 g subsample of the bulk sediment was wet-sieved through 2 mm, 1 mm, 850 μm, 600 μm, 500 μm, 425 μm, 250 μm and 125 μm nested Endecotts sieves.…”
Section: -40 Suiimentioning
confidence: 99%