2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jasrep.2017.05.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Best practices for calibrating and reporting stable isotope measurements in archaeology

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
146
0
6

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 161 publications
(154 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
2
146
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…Some guidelines on reporting isotope data are available for archaeology (Szpak et al . ; Roberts et al . ) and forensics (Dunn et al .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some guidelines on reporting isotope data are available for archaeology (Szpak et al . ; Roberts et al . ) and forensics (Dunn et al .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Standard uncertainty was determined to be ±0.15‰ for δ 13 C and ±0.3‰ for δ 15 N as calculated by the method presented by Szpak et al . () (additional details are provided in the Supplementary Methods).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Carbon and nitrogen isotopic compositions were calibrated relative to VPDB (Vienna Pee Dee Belemnite) and AIR (atmospheric nitrogen), respectively, using a two‐point calibration anchored by USGS40 and USGS41. Analytical uncertainty was determined to be ± 0.26 for δ 13 C and ± 0.29 for δ 15 N (Szpak et al, ); additional details on analytical accuracy and precision are provided in the supplementary material.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%