Special Research Paper on “Conservation and Management of Stone Cultural Heritage and Paleontological Site”

Split Viewer

Econ. Environ. Geol. 2023; 56(6): 675-695

Published online December 29, 2023

https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

© THE KOREAN SOCIETY OF ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL GEOLOGY

A Study on Conservation Management Systems based on Deterioration Diagnosis of the Fossil Site: Tracksite of Dinosaurs and Pterosaurs in Sanbuk-dong, Gunsan, Korea

Hye Ri Yang, Gyu Hye Lee, Chan Hee Lee*

Department of Cultural Heritage Conservation Sciences, Kongju National University, Gongju 32588, Korea

Correspondence to : *chanlee@kongju.ac.kr

Received: November 26, 2023; Revised: December 12, 2023; Accepted: December 13, 2023

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided original work is properly cited.

Abstract

The tracksite of dinosaurs and pterosaurs in Sanbuk-dong of Gunsan is the largest early Cretaceous dinosaur footprint fossil site in Korea, and all the footprints are important evidence indicating that large ornithopod and theropod dinosaurs inhabited the Korean peninsula during the early Cretaceous. The Sanbuk-dong site was covered with waterproof sheet in an outdoor environment until the installation of a protective enclosure in 2021. As a result, various factors such as shear force, load reduction, temperature and humidity fluctuations, acid rain, salinity and microorganisms have complexly interacted in the substrate of fossils, exacerbating the damage to footprints. For 159 footprints in 12 trackways among the footprints found in the site, the damage types were classified in detail and the level of each damage was assessed. The damages were classified into 6 types through the classification of deterioration degree of individual footprints. As a result of ultrasonic physical property evaluation on the surface of the fossil site, most of these footprints are in the completely weathered (CW) stage. Furthermore, various weathering patterns were observed in the study area, and surface contaminants were analyzed along the stratigraphy. Although the patterns of freshness and contaminants varied at different points within the fossil site, the chemical compositions were similar. Based on the results, an efficient conservation management system for dinosaur footprint fossils was established, and a conservation treatment type for each footprint was proposed.

Keywords tracksite of dinosaurs and pterosaurs, damage type, surface contaminants, completely weathered stage, conservation treatment type

화석지 손상도 정밀진단 기반 보존관리체계 연구: 군산 산북동 공룡발자국과 익룡발자국 화석산지

양혜리 · 이규혜 · 이찬희*

국립공주대학교 문화재보존과학과

요 약

군산 산북동 공룡과 익룡발자국 화석산지는 국내 최대의 전기 백악기 공룡발자국 화석지이며, 모든 발자국은 대형 조각류와 수각류 공룡들이 전기 백악기에 한반도에 서식하였음을 지시하는 중요한 증거이다. 산북동 화석산지는 2021년 보호각 설치 이전까지 야외 환경에서 방수포로 보호되어 있었다. 이로 인해 화석의 기반암에는 전단력, 하중 감소, 온습도변화, 산성비, 염분 및 미생물 등이 복합적으로 작용하여 발자국의 손상이 가중되었다. 이 연구에서는 발자국 화석 중 형태 및 보행렬 확인이 가능한 12개 보행렬의 159개 발자국을 대상으로 각각의 손상정도를 평가하고 6개의 손상유형으로 분류하였다. 화석산지 전체 표면에 대한 초음파 물성평가 결과, 대부분 완전풍화단계(CW)를 보였다. 또한 연구대상 화석산지에는 다양한 풍화양상이 나타나 층준별 표면의 오염원을 분석한 결과, 화석산지의 신선부와 오염물은 지점별로 양상은 상이하나 조성은 거의 유사하였다. 이를 바탕으로 공룡 및 익룡발자국 화석산지의 효율적인 보존관리체계를 구축하였으며 각 발자국의 보존처리 유형을 제안하였다.

주요어 공룡 및 익룡발자국 화석산지, 손상유형, 표면오염물, 완전 풍화단계, 보존처리 유형

Article

Special Research Paper on “Conservation and Management of Stone Cultural Heritage and Paleontological Site”

Econ. Environ. Geol. 2023; 56(6): 675-695

Published online December 29, 2023 https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

Copyright © THE KOREAN SOCIETY OF ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL GEOLOGY.

A Study on Conservation Management Systems based on Deterioration Diagnosis of the Fossil Site: Tracksite of Dinosaurs and Pterosaurs in Sanbuk-dong, Gunsan, Korea

Hye Ri Yang, Gyu Hye Lee, Chan Hee Lee*

Department of Cultural Heritage Conservation Sciences, Kongju National University, Gongju 32588, Korea

Correspondence to:*chanlee@kongju.ac.kr

Received: November 26, 2023; Revised: December 12, 2023; Accepted: December 13, 2023

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided original work is properly cited.

Abstract

The tracksite of dinosaurs and pterosaurs in Sanbuk-dong of Gunsan is the largest early Cretaceous dinosaur footprint fossil site in Korea, and all the footprints are important evidence indicating that large ornithopod and theropod dinosaurs inhabited the Korean peninsula during the early Cretaceous. The Sanbuk-dong site was covered with waterproof sheet in an outdoor environment until the installation of a protective enclosure in 2021. As a result, various factors such as shear force, load reduction, temperature and humidity fluctuations, acid rain, salinity and microorganisms have complexly interacted in the substrate of fossils, exacerbating the damage to footprints. For 159 footprints in 12 trackways among the footprints found in the site, the damage types were classified in detail and the level of each damage was assessed. The damages were classified into 6 types through the classification of deterioration degree of individual footprints. As a result of ultrasonic physical property evaluation on the surface of the fossil site, most of these footprints are in the completely weathered (CW) stage. Furthermore, various weathering patterns were observed in the study area, and surface contaminants were analyzed along the stratigraphy. Although the patterns of freshness and contaminants varied at different points within the fossil site, the chemical compositions were similar. Based on the results, an efficient conservation management system for dinosaur footprint fossils was established, and a conservation treatment type for each footprint was proposed.

Keywords tracksite of dinosaurs and pterosaurs, damage type, surface contaminants, completely weathered stage, conservation treatment type

화석지 손상도 정밀진단 기반 보존관리체계 연구: 군산 산북동 공룡발자국과 익룡발자국 화석산지

양혜리 · 이규혜 · 이찬희*

국립공주대학교 문화재보존과학과

Received: November 26, 2023; Revised: December 12, 2023; Accepted: December 13, 2023

요 약

군산 산북동 공룡과 익룡발자국 화석산지는 국내 최대의 전기 백악기 공룡발자국 화석지이며, 모든 발자국은 대형 조각류와 수각류 공룡들이 전기 백악기에 한반도에 서식하였음을 지시하는 중요한 증거이다. 산북동 화석산지는 2021년 보호각 설치 이전까지 야외 환경에서 방수포로 보호되어 있었다. 이로 인해 화석의 기반암에는 전단력, 하중 감소, 온습도변화, 산성비, 염분 및 미생물 등이 복합적으로 작용하여 발자국의 손상이 가중되었다. 이 연구에서는 발자국 화석 중 형태 및 보행렬 확인이 가능한 12개 보행렬의 159개 발자국을 대상으로 각각의 손상정도를 평가하고 6개의 손상유형으로 분류하였다. 화석산지 전체 표면에 대한 초음파 물성평가 결과, 대부분 완전풍화단계(CW)를 보였다. 또한 연구대상 화석산지에는 다양한 풍화양상이 나타나 층준별 표면의 오염원을 분석한 결과, 화석산지의 신선부와 오염물은 지점별로 양상은 상이하나 조성은 거의 유사하였다. 이를 바탕으로 공룡 및 익룡발자국 화석산지의 효율적인 보존관리체계를 구축하였으며 각 발자국의 보존처리 유형을 제안하였다.

주요어 공룡 및 익룡발자국 화석산지, 손상유형, 표면오염물, 완전 풍화단계, 보존처리 유형

    Fig 1.

    Figure 1.Comparison with site environment and preservation status of dinosaur and pterosaur footprints trackway site in the study area. (A) Location and terrain. (B) Panoramic view in 2018. (C) Panoramic view of the fossil site protected by a tarp. (D) Panoramic view in 2023. (E) Interior view of shelter in the fossil site.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 2.

    Figure 2.Schematic maps showing the dinosaur footprints trackway site in the study area. (A) Status of each sedimentary stratigraphic horizon. A to E; exposed layer in outcrop. (B) Distribution and location of trackways.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 3.

    Figure 3.Occurrences of theropod and ornithopod trackways in the study area. (A) Theropod footprints from the layer B and C. (B) Theropod footprints from the C layer. (C) Ornithopod footprints from the B layer. (D) Footprints with paleosol filling the interior. (E, F) Theropod footprint of trackway. (G, H) Preservation status of footprints observed in the E layer.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 4.

    Figure 4.Lithological photographs, polarizing microscopic images and X-ray powder diffraction patterns for host rocks of dinosaur footprints trackway site in the study area. (A, B) Occurrence of siltstone. (C, D) Occurrence of shale. (E) X-ray powder diffraction patterns. Ch; chlorite, il; Ilite/mica, Q; quartz, P; plagioclase.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 5.

    Figure 5.Representative physical weathering states of dinosaur footprints trackway site in the study area. (A) Microcrack. (B) Structural crack. (C) Blistering. (D) Exfoliation. (E) Surface of fossil site with large amount of fragmentation developed. (F) Fragmentation inside footprints. (G, H) Joints inside footprints.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 6.

    Figure 6.Algorithm for classifying damage types of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 7.

    Figure 7.States of representative damage types of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area. (A, B) Type Ⅰ. (C, D) Type Ⅱ. (E, F) Type Ⅲ. (G, H) Type Ⅳ. (I) Type Ⅴ. (J) Type Ⅵ.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 8.

    Figure 8.Distribution map showing the damage types of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 9.

    Figure 9.Diagrams showing the occupancy, crack index (CI) and quantitative deterioration rate by damage types of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 10.

    Figure 10.Ultrasonic velocity measurement points and the 2D contour modeling map of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 11.

    Figure 11.Histogram showing the weathering coefficient and share of weathering grade through ultrasonic velocity of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 12.

    Figure 12.Detail P-XRF measuring points for fresh part and surface contaminants of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area. (A to C) Fresh parts. (D, E) Yellow contaminants. (F to H) Red contaminants. (I, J) White contaminants. (K, L) Waterproof sheet powder.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 13.

    Figure 13.Measuring points and concentrations in ppm on fresh part and surface contaminants of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area. Numbers are the same as those in Table 5.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 14.

    Figure 14.Microphotographs showing the representative scanning electron microscope (SEM) and energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) analysis for surface contaminants of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area. Measuring points are the same as those in Table 6. (A, B) C-1. (C) C-2. (D, E) Y-1. (F) R-3. (G, H) W-2. (I, J) B-1.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 15.

    Figure 15.Representative photographs showing the conservation treatment types of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area. (A, B) Type A. (C, D) Type B. (E, F) Type C. (G, H) Type D.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 16.

    Figure 16.Distribution map showing the suggestion types for conservation treatments of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Fig 17.

    Figure 17.Diagrams showing the shares by conservation treatment types of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area.
    Economic and Environmental Geology 2023; 56: 675-695https://doi.org/10.9719/EEG.2023.56.6.675

    Dinosaur footprints layer, trackway and quantity of footprints in the study area. Location of the trackway numbers are the same as those in Figure 2.


    TypeTrackwayFootprints
    B LayerOrnithopodTW230
    TW312
    TW43
    TW510
    TW613
    TW730
    TW815
    TW97
    TW105
    TW1413
    TW1511
    SauropodTW01-A6
    C LayerSauropodTW01-B4


    Number and occupation ratios (%) by damage types dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area.


    Track wayTypeⅠType ⅡType ⅢType ⅣType ⅤType ⅥFoot-prints
    No.Ratio (%)No.Ratio (%)No.Ratio (%)No.Ratio (%)No.Ratio (%)No.Ratio (%)
    1------990.0--110.010
    2--310.0723.31240.0413.3413.330
    3--433.3--18.3--758.312
    4--133.3------266.73
    5--220.0--330.0--550.010
    617.7646.117.7215.4--323.113
    7516.726.7723.3723.3620.0310.030
    8----533.3640.0--426.715
    9--228.6--342.9228.6--7
    10240.0240.0------120.05
    14--538.5215.4538.5--17.713
    15----218.228.2--763.611
    Total82724501238159
    Share(%)5.017.015.131.47.523.9100.0


    Crack index and deterioration rate (%) by damage types of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area.


    TypeTypeⅠType ⅡType ⅢType ⅣType ⅤAverage
    Crack IndexJoint0.90.80.40.60.60.7
    Sturctural0.20.00.00.00.00.1
    Micro0.60.51.40.52.81.2
    Blistering1.20.11.30.12.31.0
    Total2.91.43.11.25.73.0
    Blistering (%)7.00.03.90.02.72.7
    Exfoliation (%)9.30.00.20.10.72.1
    Fragmentation (%)1.04.00.30.92.31.7


    Summary on ultrasonic velocity measurement results of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area.


    ClassificationMaxMinMeanSD
    Ultrasonic velocity (m/s)3,818335943599
    Weathering coefficient (k)0.9100.750.16

    SD; standard deviation.



    Surface contaminant samples and collected locations of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area. Location of each measuring points are presented on the Figure 13.


    TypePointLayerSample
    Fresh PartC-1B layer
    C-2
    C-3C layer
    C-4E layer
    ContaminantsYellowY-1B layer
    Y-2×
    Reddish BrownR-1C layer×
    R-2B layer×
    R-3
    R-4×
    WhiteW-1B layer×
    W-2
    Waterproof PowderB-1B layer
    B-2A layer×


    Measurement results in ppm on the contaminants by P-XRF of dinosaur footprints trackway site in the study area.


    Measuring PointSiAlFeMnCaKTiSBa
    Fresh PartC-1268,675122,78459,7752524,95140,6057,294705-
    C-2283,100110,64062,163-3,36633,5656,170-2,848
    C-3284,001111,15356,1073243,15337,8736,1701,986-
    C-4265,982127,38456,8392462,97941,5436,170809-
    ContaminantsY-1264,071111,00698,2182072,78730,1305,8972,913-
    Y-2256,823147,47761,2645852,03225,6107,012--
    R-1192,615120,268146,74416,1168,70441,51717,4939,544-
    R-2248,337119,99098,9423522,99739,8507,0272,948-
    R-3238,383123,94372,67827,9056,11330,2318,0587,4955,308
    R-4243,232123,48474,53720,8023,83938,4169,9293,051-
    W-1302,402112,87028,841-1,38228,73210,3141,870-
    W-2273,979125,38052,898-2,23633,8828,2686,413-
    B-1244,301113,22664,08845,8837,43827,4606,5574,2063,338
    B-255,12632,64542,1051,926406,360-84,2482,687-
    Average244,359114,44669,6578,18632,73832,10113,6153,188821

    C; Fresh parts, Y; Yellow, R; Reddish brown, W; White, B; Waterproof sheet powder.



    Results on contaminant analysis by SEM-EDS of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area.


    Measuring pointOxide Concentration (wt.%)
    SiO2MgOAl2O3FeOMnOCaONa2OK2OBaOSO4C
    Fresh PartC-1144.513.4930.732.53--1.2211.70--5.50
    245.683.9829.496.67-0.43-8.16--4.99
    C-2346.324.4121.026.71-0.311.733.90--5.58
    443.643.8723.838.22---7.36--10.90
    551.602.6920.236.87-0.62-6.34-0.915.58
    ContaminantsY-1651.393.0215.2212.911.494.321.324.760.31-4.62
    712.970.703.072.25-2.14-2.15-2.4674.26
    858.071.7113.315.80-0.99-5.58--14.52
    R-3934.74-21.0415.912.74--21.15--4.42
    1040.751.2927.699.584.890.63-10.85--2.31
    W-21160.240.7320.986.03---6.84--3.30
    1248.792.6221.7510.29---8.41--6.05
    1372.801.9415.213.92---3.57--2.51
    B-11436.731.7512.806.1932.403.85-2.62--1.57
    1521.931.637.577.3149.783.83-1.723.65-2.57
    1632.33-10.3212.5636.693.43-1.89--2.78
    1733.242.9312.746.5327.852.54-1.551.74-10.52
    1825.732.7511.858.4833.253.74-2.353.66-8.18

    Location of each measuring points are presented on the Figure 14.



    Classification on deterioration types and representative treatment method of dinosaur footprints trackway in the study area.


    Track waysType AType BType CType DTotal Number
    No.Ratio(%)No.Ratio(%)No.Ratio(%)No.Ratio(%)
    110100.0------10
    22170.0--826.713.330
    312100.0------12
    43100.0------3
    510100.0------10
    61184.6--215.4--13
    71756.726.71033.313.330
    81066.616.7426.7--15
    97100.0------7
    10360.0--240.0--5
    141184.6--215.4--13
    15981.8--19.119.111
    TotalNo.1243293158
    (%)78.01.918.21.8100.0
    Weathering FormFragmentationFragmentation Structural crackFragmentation BlisteringFragmentation Structural crack Blistering-
    TreatmentConsolidationConsolidation AdhesionConsolidation FillingConsolidation Adhesion, Filling

    KSEEG
    Apr 30, 2024 Vol.57 No.2, pp. 107~280

    Stats or Metrics

    Share this article on

    • kakao talk
    • line

    Related articles in KSEEG

    Economic and Environmental Geology

    pISSN 1225-7281
    eISSN 2288-7962
    qr-code Download