Start |Author Index | View Uploaded Presentations | Meeting Information

2002 Denver Annual Meeting (October 27-30, 2002)

Paper No. 13
Presentation Time: 8:00 AM-12:00 PM

DEVELOPING ESR DATING FOR SHARKS' TEETH: TOWARDS A NEW GEOCHRONOLOGICAL METHOD FOR SEDIMENTOLOGICAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL ANALYSIS


CHADERTON II, Donovan A.1, BLACKWELL, Bonnie A.B.2, BLICKSTEIN, Joel I.B.1, SKINNER, Anne R.2, MAISEY, John G.3 and DIVJAK, Mimi N.1, (1)RFK Science Research Institute, 7540 Parsons Blvd, Flushing, NY 11366, (2)Dept. of Chemistry, Williams College, Williamstown, MA 01267, (3)Division of Paleontology, American Museum of Nat History, 79th St. & Central Park W, New York, NY 10024-5192, N/A

Enameloid from three species of fossil sharks was examined for its suitability for ESR dating analysis. Similar in structure and geochemistry to mammalian enamel, shark enameloid contains a mineral matrix of hydroxyapatite. The characteristic radiation-sensitive hydroxyapatite signal occurs in the shark enameloid centred at g=2.0018. The three species all showed similar ESR signals that grew consistently with added radiation dose. A low-intensity narrow interference peak occurs consistently for enameloid in all three species at g ~ 2.006, while a much broader peak appears at g ~ 2.056. Neither affect the measurement of ESR signal intensity for the hydroxyapatite dating peak at g=2.0018. Side-band peaks, attrributed to organic radicals, also occur on either side of the dating peak. The differences between the enameloid signal in the shark and the enamel signal in mammalian enamel suggest that shark enameloid contains more organic matter and may be formed differently in the developing embryo from mammalian enamel.

Both Carcharodon megalodon (great white shark) and Isurus hastalis (mako shark) teeth contained enough enameloid per tooth to provide one to two subsamples with 10-15 aliquots. Tiger shark teeth (Galeocerdo aduncus) were too small to provide sufficient enameloid for a growth curve to be constructed. Preparing sharks' teeth for dating required total preparation times averaging less than 2 hours per subsample, making it an inexpensive technique.

Radiation-sensitivity for the ESR signal is similar in all three species, with saturation occurring after 3-4 Mrad of total radiation dose. Growth curves provided accumulated doses with precisions ranging from 3% to 8% after 12-15 added doses. Tests for dating accuracy now need to be completed.

Session No. 187--Booth# 46

Paleontology/Paleobotany (Posters) II
Wednesday, 30 October 2002: 8:00 AM-12:00 PM
Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs. Vol. 34, No. 6, September 2002, p.424
© Copyright 2002 The Geological Society of America (GSA), all rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted to the author(s) of this abstract to reproduce and distribute it freely, for noncommercial purposes. Permission is hereby granted to any individual scientist to download a single copy of this electronic file and reproduce up to 20 paper copies for noncommercial purposes advancing science and education, including classroom use, providing all reproductions include the complete content shown here, including the author information. All other forms of reproduction and/or transmittal are prohibited without written permission from GSA Copyright Permissions.
Back to: Paleontology/Paleobotany (Posters) II
<< Previous Abstract | Next Abstract >>