Testing the suitability of dim sedimentary quartz from northern Switzerland for OSL burial dose estimation

Mareike Trauerstein; Sally E. Lowick; Frank Preusser; Heinz Veit

Open Access

Testing the suitability of dim sedimentary quartz from northern Switzerland for OSL burial dose estimation

and

| Apr 12, 2017

Volume 44 (2017): Issue 1 (January 2017)

About this article

Cite

Page range: 66 - 76

Received: Sep 22, 2016

Accepted: Feb 20, 2017

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/geochr-2015-0058

Keywords
OSL, quartz, dim, signal components, lifetime, Alps

© 2016 M. Trauerstein.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Results of the preheat dose recovery tests (large aliquots) for sample STH01 and ABH09 and the small aliquot dose recovery tests for sample RUM04 and ABH08. Large aliquot dose recovery ratios were calculated using the arithmetic mean with standard error, small aliquot dose recovery ratios were calculated using the Central Age Model (CAM).

Mathematically deconvoluted signals of (a) a signal with a high fast ratio (FR = 19 ± 3) and (b) a low fast ratio (FR = 6 ± 1). Shaded area represents the time integral over which the initial signal was integrated (0.4 s).

Fig. 3. Fast ratio for the natural signal plotted against the fast ratio of the regenerated signal for each aliquot of sample ATH01 (a) and STH01 (b). White dots show aliquots with an IR depletion ratio > 0.8, black dots show aliquots with an IR depletion ratio < 0.8.

Small aliquot (A–D) and single grain (E–F) De values obtained with different approaches and for samples in this study. n = number of aliquots used for De calculation; filled symbols = De calculated using the Central age model (Galbraith et al., 1999); open symbols = De calculated using the Minimum Age Model (MAM3, sigma b = 0.3) (Galbraith et al., 1999); A – conventional rejection criteria; B – EBG approach, C – rejection of aliquots with fast ratio (natural) ≠ A fast ratio (regen); D – rejection of aliquots with fast ratio (natural) and/or fast ratio (regen) < 15; E – conventional rejection criteria; F – EBG approach. Horizontal lines extending the results of approach A are added for easier comparison of values.

Lifetimes calculated from isothermal decay measurements for sample ABH09 and STH01 at 10 and 20°C. Dotted line indicates the lifetime required for a stable signal of samples <100 ka (expected age of samples in this study).

Lifetimes at 10°C plotted for each measured aliquot against (a) its previously determined De value and (b) fast ratio of the regenerated signal.

Single grain dose recovery ratios (DRR), number of grains (n) and overdispersion (OD) for different fast ratio thresholds (FR) and the EBG approach for sample ABH07 (a), ABH08 (b), AM01 (c) and DM02 (d).

Single grain De values plotted as histogram (bin width = 16) and individual values in ranked order for sample ABH07. Bin with of Filled symbols show grains with natural signals that exhibit a fast ratio > 20.

Small aliquot data. N = number of aliquots measured, n = number of aliquots used for De calculation, OD = overdispersion, De - CAM = equivalent dose calculated using the Central age model by Galbraith et al. (1999), A = to select aliquots for De calculation conventional rejection criteria were applied as described in chapter 2, B = individuals Des were determined using an early background and conventional rejection criteria were applied, C = conventional rejection criteria were applied and additionally all aliquots with FRnat ≠ FRreg were excluded, D = conventional rejection criteria were applied and additionally all aliquots with FRnat and FRreg < 15 were excluded.

		A: Conventional approach			B: EBG approach			C: FR_nat = FR_reg approach			D: FR > 15 approach
	N	n	OD (%)	D_e - CAM	n	OD	D_e - CAM	n	OD	D_e - CAM	n	OD	D_e - CAM
	N	n	/skew	(Gy)	n	(%)	(Gy)	n	(%)	(Gy)	n	(%)	(Gy)
ABH07	48	22	33/0.35	74.8 ± 5.4	27	35	80.1 ± 5.7	11	29	78.9 ± 7.1	3	37	86.6 ± 18.8

ABH08	45	32	27/0.11	105.9 ± 5.3	28	25	111.2 ± 5.6	16	23	99.4 ± 6.2	14	28	115.7 ± 8.9

ABH09	48	26	36/0.69	103.8 ± 7.6	21	36	113.9 ± 9.6	14	27	92.5 ± 7.3	7	42	109.5 ± 17.7

STH01	45	24	29/–0.40	156.5 ± 9.8	25	31	172.4 ± 11.6	6	38	144.9 ± 23.5	6	25	156.6 ± 16.7

IFF01	28	13	56/0.55	113.7 ± 11.9	13	61	112.2 ± 19.2	4	24	118.7 ± 14.7	7	56	128.3 ± 27.1

RUM04	45	24	30/0.68	70.8 ± 4.8	13	26	75.6 ± 5.9	13	26	64.7 ± 5.1	2	-	84.9 ± 3.3

ATH01	86	32	39/0.17	104.9 ± 7.6	33	38	107.1 ± 7.6	16	40	108.0 ± 8.9	9	51	98.9 ± 17.1

ATH04	72	17	38/–0.75	52.9 ± 5.2	13	25	65.4 ± 5.2	9	44	49.4 ± 7.7	8	26	64.6 ± 6.2

DM02	41	22	27/-0.79	16.1 ± 1	19	28	15.9 ± 1.2	19	27	15.7 ± 1.1	2	-	12.8 ± 3.1

Single grain data. N = number of grains measured, n = number of grains used for De calculation, OD = overdispersion, Skew of De distribution following Bailey and Arnold (2006), De - CAM = equivalent dose calculated using the Central age model by Galbraith et al. (1999), E = to select aliquots for De calculation conventional rejection criteria were applied as described in chapter 2, F = individuals Des were determined using an early background and conventional rejection criteria were applied.

		E: Conventional approach					F: EBG approach
	N	n	OD	Skew	D_e - CAM	D_e - MAM	n	OD	Skew	D_e - CAM	D_e - MAM
	N	n	(%)	Skew	(Gy)	(Gy)	n	(%)	Skew	(Gy)	(Gy)
ABH07	2200	71	58	1.15	89.3 ± 6.5	54.8 ± 7.8	35	73	0.72	87.2 ± 11	44.4 ± 15.5

ABH08	2400	43	56	0.79	103.4 ± 9.2	57.4 ± 17.1	27	54	0.32	105.9 ± 11.5	62.8 ± 23.2

ABH09	2900	54	49	1.19	100.9 ± 7.2	67.7 ± 18.3	30	48	0.52	100.8 ± 9.4	67.9 ± 21.5

STH01	5700	57	69	0.24	134.6 ± 12.8	74.1 ± 20.6	27	92	–0.08	140.7 ± 25.5	62.1 ± 27.2

IFF01	3100	26	74	1.36	72.4 ± 10.8	34.1 ± 14.5	12	69	1.27	61.1 ± 12.5	34.5 ± 18.6

RUM04	2000	12	48	–0.35	50.6 ± 7.4	-	5	34	0.01	61.6 ± 10.6	-

ATH01	3000	21	36	–0.28	104.3 ± 12.1	-	9	65	0.02	82.1 ± 18.5	-

ATH04	3000	27	19	–0.77	59.6 ± 2.8	-	12	26	–1.21	60.2 ± 5.4	-

DM02	1400	22	24	–0.74	15.6 ± 0.9	-	18	24	0.51	16.9 ± 1.1	-

eISSN:: 1897-1695
Language:: English

Publication timeframe:: Volume Open
Journal Subjects:: Geosciences, other

Journal RSS Feed

Testing the suitability of dim sedimentary quartz from northern Switzerland for OSL burial dose estimation

Published Online: Apr 12, 2017

Page range: 66 - 76

Received: Sep 22, 2016

Accepted: Feb 20, 2017

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/geochr-2015-0058

Keywords
OSL, quartz, dim, signal components, lifetime, Alps

© 2016 M. Trauerstein.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Testing the suitability of dim sedimentary quartz from northern Switzerland for OSL burial dose estimation

Published Online: Apr 12, 2017

Page range: 66 - 76

Received: Sep 22, 2016

Accepted: Feb 20, 2017

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/geochr-2015-0058

KeywordsOSL, quartz, dim, signal components, lifetime, Alps

© 2016 M. Trauerstein.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Keywords
OSL, quartz, dim, signal components, lifetime, Alps