4.7 Article

Archaeological Prospection in Wetlands-Experiences and Observations from Ground-Penetrating Radar Surveys in Norwegian Bogs

期刊

REMOTE SENSING
卷 13, 期 16, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/rs13163170

关键词

GPR; wetland; peat; bog; archaeological registrations

资金

  1. Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research (NIKU)
  2. NIKU
  3. Nye Veier AS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Wetlands are important for preserving archaeological remains, but detecting and registering them is challenging. Alternative methods are needed to support traditional archaeological work in such environments.
Wetlands are of immense importance for archaeological research due to excellent preservation conditions for organic material. However, the detection and registration of archaeological remains in waterlogged areas, such as peatlands, bogs, mires, or lakeshores are very challenging. Alternative methods that can support traditional archaeological registrations and that can help to survey wetlands more efficiently are needed. One goal of the Arkeologi pa nye veier (Archaeology on new ways) project, initiated by Nye Veier AS, was to develop and test a practical solution for non-invasive geophysical surveys in wetland environments in support of traditional archaeological investigations. For that purpose, a custom GPR system for wetland investigations was assembled, tested and applied at Gausdal (Flekkefjord municipality, Agder county) in Norway within the E39-southwest infrastructure project. The GPR survey resulted in promising data, clearly showing the buried remains of an old road within the investigated area. This case study demonstrated the potential of GPR measurements in peatlands as a valuable asset for archaeological registration projects in such environments. However, despite these first encouraging results, wetlands remain very challenging environments, and realistic expectations, as well as a good understanding of the potential and limitations of this approach are a prerequisite for meaningful surveys.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据