ArticleArchaeological prospection
Combining geophysical prospection and core drilling: Reconstruction of a Late Bronze Age copper mine at Prigglitz-Gasteil in the Eastern Alps (Austria).
Article in Archaeological prospection. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prehistoric mines are often too large and too deep for conventional archaeological excavations. Non-destructive and minimally invasive methods of prospection can help to overcome these limits. Our case study of a Late Bronze Age opencast mine (ca. 1050 to 780 BC) shows the potential of geophysical prospection methods combined with core drillings. For the reconstruction of this mine, we combined electrical resistivity and induced polarization (IP) tomography, seismic refraction tomography (SRT) and ground penetrating radar (GPR). The geophysical data were collected based on an orthogonal grid of 10 longitudinal and transverse profiles, laid out over an area of ~330 × 300 m. The profiles allowed a three-dimensional interpolation of the geological units, the mining dumps, the mining areas and the residual mineralization. Additionally, two deep cores were drilled to ground-truth the geophysical prospection results. They provided information about the stratification at intersections of the measurement grid, and this proved crucial for validating the interpreted geophysical profiles. Each geophysical method applied provided different information for the reconstruction of the site: the electrical resistivity tomography offered the best clues as to the locations of the geological units and the dumps, the seismic refraction tomography visualized the transition between the dump or backfill layers and the underlying bedrock, and the IP measurements revealed residual mineralization. The georadar measurements, on the other hand, did not contribute to the interpretation owing to the limited depth of penetration. Based on the combination of borehole and geophysical data, it was possible to develop a hypothetical model of an open-pit mine for copper ore that developed in three phases (mines A-C) during the Late Bronze Age. Without the control provided by the core drillings, one of the mining areas (mine A) could not have been correctly identified in the geophysical prospections.
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.