The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 65 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparing the Use of Magnetic Beads with Ultrafiltration for Ancient Dental Calculus Proteomics
Abstract
Over the past two decades, proteomic analysis has greatly developed in application to the field of biomolecular archaeology, coinciding with advancements in LC-MS/MS instrumentation sensitivity and improvements in sample preparation methods. Recently, human dental calculus has received much attention for its well-preserved proteomes locked in mineralized dental plaque which stores information on human diets and the oral microbiome otherwise invisible to other biomolecular approaches. Maximizing proteome recovery in ancient dental calculus, available only in minute quantities and irreplaceable after destructive analysis, is of paramount importance. Here, we compare the more traditional ultrafiltration-based and acetone precipitation approaches with the newer paramagnetic bead approach in order to test the influence of demineralization acid on recovered proteome complexity obtained from specimens as well as the sequence coverages matched for significant proteins. We found that a protocol utilizing EDTA combined with paramagnetic beads increased proteome complexity, in some cases doubling the number of unique peptides and number of proteins matched, compared to protocols involving the use of HCl and either acetone precipitation or ultrafiltration. Although the increase in the number of proteins was almost exclusively of bacterial origin, a development that has implications for the study of diseases within these ancient populations, an increase in the peptide number for the dairy proteins β-lactoglobulin and casein was also observed reflecting an increase in sequence coverage for these dietary proteins of interest. We also consider structural explanations for the discrepancies observed between these two key dietary proteins preserved in archaeological dental calculus.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“When it comes to analyzing ancient human remains, most studies work with historic dental calculus [11, 15, 22-26], as it is a stable, long-term reservoir of proteins [27].”
From Metaproteomic analysis of King Ghezo tomb wall (Abomey, Benin) confirms 19th century voodoo sacrifices (2024) · cites this paper as [15]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Dewhirst, F. E., Chen, T., Izard, J., Paster, B. J., Tanner, A. C. R., Yu, W.-H., Lakshmanan, A., & Wade, W. G. (2010) · Journal of Bacteriology · doi:10.1128/jb.00542-10 · Cited by 3,352
Single-pot, solid-phase-enhanced sample preparation for proteomics experiments
Hughes, C. S., Moggridge, S., Müller, T., Sorensen, P. H. B., Morin, G. B., & Krijgsveld, J. (2018) · Nature Protocols · doi:10.1038/s41596-018-0082-x · Cited by 1,997
The Cambridge encyclopedia of human paleopathology
(1999) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.36-2492 · Cited by 1,322
Ultrasensitive proteome analysis using paramagnetic bead technology
Hughes, C. S., Föehr, S., Garfield, D. A., Furlong, E. E. M., Steinmetz, L. M., & Krijgsveld, J. (2014) · Molecular Systems Biology · doi:10.15252/msb.20145625 · Cited by 1,245
A rapid and robust method for single cell chromatin accessibility profiling
Chen, X., Miragaia, R. J., Natarajan, K. N., & Teichmann, S. A. (2018) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-018-07771-0 · Cited by 1,147
Hillson, S. (1996) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139170697 · Cited by 1,017
Recalibrating equus evolution using the genome sequence of an early middle pleistocene horse
Orlando, L., Ginolhac, A., Zhang, G., Froese, D., Albrechtsen, A., Stiller, M., Schubert, M., Cappellini, E., Petersen, B., Moltke, I., et al. (2013) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature12323 · Cited by 841
The half-life of DNA in bone: measuring decay kinetics in 158 dated fossils
Allentoft, M. E., Collins, M., Harker, D., Haile, J., Oskam, C. L., Hale, M. L., Campos, P. F., Samaniego, J. A., Gilbert, M. T. P., Willerslev, E., et al. (2012) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2012.1745 · Cited by 633
Adler, C. J., Dobney, K., Weyrich, L. S., Kaidonis, J., Walker, A. W., Haak, W., Bradshaw, C. J. A., Townsend, G., Sołtysiak, A., Alt, K. W., et al. (2013) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.2536 · Cited by 621
Neanderthal behaviour, diet, and disease inferred from ancient DNA in dental calculus
Weyrich, L. S., Duchêne, S., Soubrier, J., Arriola, L. A., Llamas, B., Breen, J., Morris, A. G., Alt, K. W., Caramelli, D., Dresely, V., et al. (2017) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature21674 · Cited by 603
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- De La Fuente C., 2012, Archaeometry, 55, 766
- Sawyer L., 2013, In Advanced Dairy Chemistry, 1, 319
- Farrell H. M., 2002, In Methods in Molecular Biology. calcium Binding Protein Protocols, 172
- Linderström-Lang K., 1929, Compt. Rend. Trav. Lab. Carlsberg. Ser. Chim., 17, 1
Cited by
Warinner, C., Korzow Richter, K., & Collins, M. J. (2022) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00703 · Cited by 178
Charlier, P., Bourdin, V., N'Dah, D., Kielbasa, M., Pible, O., & Armengaud, J. (2024) · PROTEOMICS · doi:10.1002/pmic.202400048 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Palmer, K. S., Makarewicz, C. A., Tishkin, A. A., Tur, S. S., Chunag, A., Diimajav, E., Jamsranjav, B., & Buckley, M.
- Affiliations
- School of Natural Sciences, Manchester Institute of Biotechnology, The University of Manchester, 131 Princess Street, Manchester M1 7DN, United Kingdom
- Institute for Prehistoric and Protohistoric Archaeology, Kiel University, Johanna-Mestorf Strasse 2-6, D-24118 Kiel, Germany
- Department of Archeology, Ethnography, and Museology, Altai State University, Lenin Prospect 61, 656049 Barnaul, Russia
- Mongolian Institute of Archaeology, Ulaanbaatar 13343, Mongolia
- Department of Archaeology and History, Ulaanbataar State University, Luvsantseveen Street, 5th khoroo, 15th khorgoolol, Bayanzurk District 13343 Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
- National Museum of Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar Mongolia, Juulchin Street-1, Ulaanbaatar 13343, Mongolia
- ORCID
- Buckley, Michael
- Venue
- Journal of Proteome Research
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2021-02-17
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1689-1704
- ISSN
- 1535-3893
- 1535-3907
- Cited by
- 27
- References
- 65
- Language
- en
- Licence
- Funders
- Royal Society (UF120473)
- H2020 European Research Council (772957)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparing the Use of Magnetic Beads with Ultrafiltration for Ancient Dental Calculus Proteomics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/acs.jproteome.0c00862
- The paper
- Palmer, K. S., Makarewicz, C. A., Tishkin, A. A., Tur, S. S., Chunag, A., Diimajav, E., Jamsranjav, B., & Buckley, M. (2021). Comparing the Use of Magnetic Beads with Ultrafiltration for Ancient Dental Calculus Proteomics. Journal of Proteome Research. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jproteome.0c00862
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.