Geology Reference
In-Depth Information
3
Curation and Allocation of Samples in the U.S. Antarctic
Meteorite Collection
Kevin Righter
1
, Cecilia E. Satterwhite
1
, Kathleen M. McBride
1
, Catherine M. Corrigan
2
,
and Linda C. Welzenbach
2
3.1. INTRODUCTION
the new lunar sample handling facility in B31N. In fact,
JSC Planetary Materials Branch Chief Larry Haskin had
asked one of his research scientists, Don Bogard, to write
a report on the possible use of the available lunar
sample handling facilities for meteorites. Knowing of this
report and of the meteorite recoveries of Cassidy, John
Annexstad approached Bogard and they realized that the
U.S. Antarctic meteorites could be curated at JSC [
Sears
,
2012;
Annexstad
, 2001]. Bogard then approached Cassidy
and the arrangements began to be discussed. At the same
time, Smithsonian meteoriticists were naturally interested
in the Antarctic meteorites because they had been col-
lected by the U.S. government. Representatives from these
two agencies as well as NSF and other members of the
university community met in 1977 and 1978 to make a
plan for the short- and long-term storage, processing, and
handling of the samples. In 1980, these meetings ulti-
mately led to the establishment of a formal agreement bet-
ween NSF, NASA, and the Smithsonian (often referred to
as “the three-agency agreement”).
Some aspects of the early years deserve explanation
because there were some differences in handling appro-
aches and protocols as experience with these new samples
was gained. The 1976-1977 season recovered a total of
nine samples [
Olsen et al
., 1978] that were held under a
special agreement between the United States and Japan
[
Marvin
, 2014 (this volume)]. Samples were split at
McMurdo Station in Antarctica using a radial rock saw. In
fact, images of the 1976 season's samples show the radial
pattern of the saw cuts; samples cut in subsequent years at
JSC were done using a band saw. The samples from this
first season are stored and available at the National
Institute of Polar Research (NIPR; Tokyo, Japan), the
Field Museum of Natural History (Chicago, IL, USA),
This chapter provides an overview of the entire curation
and allocation process for the U.S. program. Parts of this
have been covered in publications that date back to the late
1980s and early 1990s [e.g.,
Bogard and Annexstad
, 1980;
Graham and Annexstad
, 1989], but an in-depth and histor-
ical review has not been published. This chapter will give
an overview of the early part of the program, describe the
curation facilities, provide a summary of samples allocated
from the collection, and give case studies of five important
meteorite samples: three small and rare samples that have
required special preservation efforts, and two larger sam-
ples that have provided amply to the scientific community.
3.2. CURATION FACILITIES AND APPROACHES
The long and difficult process of obtaining funding to
collect meteorites in Antarctica was successful due to Bill
Cassidy's persistence and tenacity. The successes of the
field efforts then raised a new issue: How would the sam-
ples be stored and curated? Although Cassidy initially had
a plan to establish a curation and processing facility at
the University of Pittsburgh, his interactions with the
community upon returning samples from the field drew
much attention from scientific groups who were interested
in being involved in this next phase. In this same time
frame, sample processing facilities were available (
Apollo
11 cabinets) [
Annexstad
, 2001] in Building 31 (B31) at
NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) after construction of
1
NASA Johnson Space Center
2
Smithsonian Institution
,
