Major
Anthropology
Faculty Advisor
Chris, Stantis
Abstract
The use of consolidants, such as polymers and adhesives, has historically been common in archaeology and museum curation for the preservation and reconstruction of skeletal remains. However, many of these materials were applied without detailed documentation, creating challenges for collections management and compliance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). Consolidants may also interfere with scientific analyses by altering the elemental and molecular composition of bone. Despite these concerns, there is currently no standardized method for identifying consolidants applied to skeletal remains. This study evaluates whether Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS), Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR), and visual identification testing can successfully distinguish between treated and untreated bone samples and identify specific consolidant types. A modern juvenile pig (Sus scrofa) tibia was used as a proxy for human bone and treated with six consolidants commonly used in museum and archaeological contexts: cyanoacrylate (CA), polyvinyl acetate (PVA), beeswax, Paraloid B-67, Paraloid B-72, and Paraloid B-76. Samples were analyzed using LIBS and ATR-FTIR, while a visual identification test was conducted with participants experienced in osteology and archaeology. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was used to evaluate spectral variation within the LIBS and FTIR datasets. The results indicate that FTIR was more effective than LIBS in differentiating consolidant groups and untreated bone samples. LIBS showed substantial overlap between groups, while visual identification testing demonstrated low overall accuracy. These findings support the use of multi-method analytical approaches for improving consolidant identification and promoting more transparent and ethical documentation practices in museum and archaeological collections.
Notes
FinalPosterSubmissionIndependantStudyNatalieEves2026.pptx (992 kB)
Poster
List of common chemical additives.xlsx (9 kB)
Notes
SciAps_Result Test# 145.pdf (58 kB)
LIBS Results
SciAps_Result Test# 146.pdf (59 kB)
LIBS Results
SciAps_Result Test# 147.pdf (58 kB)
LIBS Results
SciAps_Result Test# 149.pdf (58 kB)
LIBS Results
SciAps_Result Test# 150.pdf (58 kB)
LIBS Results
SciAps_Result Test# 151.pdf (58 kB)
LIBS Results
SciAps_Result Test# 152.pdf (58 kB)
LIBS Results
SciAps_Result Test# 153.pdf (59 kB)
LIBS Results
SciAps_Result Test# 144.pdf (59 kB)
LIBS Results
000144_2026_03_25_13430048.csv (826 kB)
LIBS Results
000145_2026_03_25_13490058.csv (822 kB)
LIBS Results
000147_2026_03_25_13540007.csv (823 kB)
LIBS Results
000148_2026_03_25_13580007.csv (826 kB)
LIBS Results
000150_2026_03_25_14010036.csv (824 kB)
LIBS Results
000151_2026_03_25_14020035.csv (823 kB)
LIBS Results
000153_2026_03_25_14110018.csv (822 kB)
LIBS Results
000146_2026_03_25_13510023.csv (826 kB)
LIBS Results
000149_2026_03_25_13590056.csv (825 kB)
LIBS Results
000152_2026_03_25_14060052.csv (823 kB)
LIBS Results
LIBS_type.png (114 kB)
LIBS Graph
LIBS_type_simp.png (83 kB)
LIBS Graph
.Rhistory (19 kB)
LIBS R Code
B67_Exp_042026_2026-04-20T12-14-22.csv (69 kB)
FTIR Results
B72_Exp_042026_2026-04-20T12-03-59.csv (69 kB)
FTIR Results
B76_Exp_042026_2026-04-20T12-10-01.csv (69 kB)
FTIR Results
Beeswax_Exp_042026_2026-04-20T12-26-17.csv (69 kB)
FTIR Results
Control_042026_2026-04-20T11-57-16.csv (69 kB)
FTIR Results
Cyanoacrylate_Exp_042026_2026-04-20T12-19-23.csv (69 kB)
FTIR Results
PVA_Exp_042026_2026-04-20T12-22-35.csv (69 kB)
FTIR Results
FTIR_type.png (113 kB)
FTIR Graph
FTIR_type_simp.png (77 kB)
FTIR Graph
FTIRResults.csv (260 kB)
FTIR Results Excel
.Rhistory (20 kB)
FTIR R Code