Cited by 295Archaeology and ancient environmental studiesAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsPaleopathology and ancient diseases

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 100 of the 100 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A guide to ancient protein studies

Open access

Abstract

Palaeoproteomics is an emerging neologism used to describe the application of mass spectrometry-based approaches to the study of ancient proteomes. As with palaeogenomics (the study of ancient DNA), it intersects evolutionary biology, archaeology and anthropology, with applications ranging from the phylogenetic reconstruction of extinct species to the investigation of past human diets and ancient diseases. However, there is no explicit consensus at present regarding standards for data reporting, data validation measures or the use of suitable contamination controls in ancient protein studies. Additionally, in contrast to the ancient DNA community, no consolidated guidelines have been proposed by which researchers, reviewers and editors can evaluate palaeoproteomics data, in part due to the novelty of the field. Here we present a series of precautions and standards for ancient protein research that can be implemented at each stage of analysis, from sample selection to data interpretation. These guidelines are not intended to impose a narrow or rigid list of authentication criteria, but rather to support good practices in the field and to ensure the generation of robust, reproducible results. As the field grows and methodologies change, so too will best practices. It is therefore essential that researchers continue to provide necessary details on how data were generated and authenticated so that the results can be independently and effectively evaluated. We hope that these proposed standards of practice will help to provide a firm foundation for the establishment of palaeoproteomics as a viable and powerful tool for archaeologists, anthropologists and evolutionary biologists.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41559-018-0510-x

Cites

100 of 100 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Show all 98 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Hare, E. & Abelson, P. H. Racemization of amino acids in fossil shells. Carnegie Inst. Wash. Yearbook 66, 526–528 (1968).
  2. Hoering, T. C. in Biogeochemistry of Amino Acids (eds Hare, P. E., Hoering, T. C. & King, K.) 193–201 (Wiley, New York, 1980).
  3. Tower, K. M. in Biogeochemistry of Amino Acids (eds Hare, P. E., Hoering, T. C. & King, K. Jr) 65–74 (Wiley, New York, 1980).
  4. Tokarski, C., Martin, E., Rolando, C. & Cren-Olivé, C. Identification of proteins in renaissance paintings by proteomics. Anal. Chem. 78, 1494–1502 (2006). · DOI
  5. Warinner, C. et al. Pathogens and host immunity in the ancient human oral cavity. Nat. Genet. 46, 336–344 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  6. Recommended Data Repositories (Scientific Data, accessed 30 May 2017); https://www.nature.com/sdata/policies/repositories

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–295 of 295

Metadata

Authors
Hendy, J., Welker, F., Demarchi, B., Speller, C., Warinner, C., & Collins, M. J.
Affiliations
  • Max Planck Institute of Geoanthropology (DE)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • University of York (GB)
  • University of Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
  • Hendy, Jessica
  • Welker, Frido
Venue
Nature Ecology & Evolution
Published
2018-03-26
Volume
2
Issue
5
Pages
791-799
ISSN
2397-334X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2794613307
Cited by
291
References
98
Citations by year
2026: 50 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 47 · 2018: 9
FWCI
4.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Ecology & Evolution (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Turin (University of Turin) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1516633, 1643318, 1523264)
  • Villum Fonden (00017649)
  • Wellcome Trust (108375, 108375/Z/15/Z)
  • European Commission (677576)
  • Danmarks Grundforskningsfond
  • Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM089886)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Archeology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Paleopathology and ancient diseases
Keywords
palaeoproteomics, ancient proteins, research guidelines, data reporting standards, data validation, contamination control, sample selection, reproducibility, ancient DNA, ancient diseases
MeSH terms
Archaeology, Paleontology, Proteomics

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