ArticleNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Conservation of Archaeological Bones: Assessment of Innovative Phosphate Consolidants in Comparison with Paraloid B72.
Article in Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Aqueous solutions of diammonium hydrogen phosphate (DAP) have been recently proposed for consolidation of archeological bones, as an alternative to traditional products. Here, we investigated several routes to improve the performance of the DAP-based treatment, namely increasing the DAP concentration, adding calcium ions and adding ethanol to the DAP solution. Archaeological bones dated to about 1-0.8 million years ago were used for the tests. After preliminary screening by FTIR microscopy and FEG-SEM among different formulations, confirming the formation of new hydroxyapatite phases, the most promising formulation was selected, namely a 3 M DAP solution. The strengthening ability of this formulation was systematically compared to that of the most widely used commercial consolidant, namely Paraloid B72. The performance of the two treatments was evaluated in terms of Knoop and Vickers microhardness, resistance to scratch and resistance to material loss by peeling off. The results of the study show that the DAP treatment was able to improve the bone surface properties and also the resistance to material loss by peeling off, which is more dependent on in-depth consolidation. Paraloid B72 led to the formation of a layer of acrylic resin on the bone surface, which influenced the mechanical tests. Nonetheless, Paraloid B72 was able to penetrate in depth and substantially decrease the material loss by peeling off, even more effectively than DAP. The results of this study indicate that the potential of the DAP treatment for bone consolidation is confirmed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.