 |
 |
Dear Christiane It is a long time since I was involved in pollen extraction techniques, but if your remaining non-pollen content is minerogenic you could try other heavy liquids/relative densities - I had some success in the late 1980s using zinc chloride with relative density of 1.9. If your remaining non-pollen content is organic, could it not be considered contemporary with the pollen and AMS dated on the humic acid, rather like a peat sample? Just a thought Duncan Hale, DN, & Noel, MJ (1991) Some quantitative pollen extraction tests leading to a modified technique for cave sediments. In, /Archaeological Sciences 1989, Proceedings of a conference on the application of scientific techniques to archaeology, Bradford, September 1989/ (eds. Budd, P, Chapman, B, Jackson, C, Janaway, RC, & Ottoway, B), Oxbow Monograph 9, 319-324, Oxford. Duncan Hale Project Manager ARCHAEOLOGICAL SERVICES DURHAM UNIVERSITY South Road Durham DH1 3LE 0191 334 1121 fax 0191 334 1126 Dr. Christiane Singer wrote: > Dear all, > > I am currently working on an organic rich clay deposit from the > Euphrates valley. AMS-dating of pollen seems to be the only way to > get any reliable age control, but as so far I did not manage to > receive sufficiently pure pollen concentrates. > The methods I have been using were: the standard methods (Faegri and > Iversen 1989) + heavy liquid separation with Sodium Polytungstate + > sieving and density solution with 1.3 sg following Vandergoes and > Prior 2003 and Newnham 2006. But still there is a lot of non-pollen > material. > > Is there anybody out there who knows how to produce nice pollen > concentrates without too much other residues, or has experience with > the matter? > > Best wishes > > Christiane Singer > > > Dr. Christiane Singer > Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität > Institut für Archäologische Wissenschaften > -Abt. Vor- und Frühgeschichte- > D-60323 Frankfurt am Main > > Tel.: +49 69 798-32112 >