CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 103

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Identifying Archaeological Bone via Non-Destructive ZooMS and the Materiality of Symbolic Expression: Examples from Iroquoian Bone Points

McGrath, Krista, Rowsell, Keri, Gates St-Pierre, Christian, Tedder, Andrew, Foody, George, Roberts, Carolynne, Speller, Camilla, Collins, Matthew·2019·Scientific Reports
DOI 10.1038/s41598-019-47299-xPMC PMC6667708
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Today, practical, functional and symbolic choices inform the selection of raw materials for worked objects. In cases where we can discern the origin of worked bone, tooth, ivory and antler objects in the past, we assume that similar choices are being made. However, morphological species identification of worked objects is often impossible due to the loss of identifying characteristics during manufacture. Here, we describe a novel non-destructive ZooMS (Zooarchaeology by Mass Spectrometry) method which was applied to bone points from Pre-Contact St. Lawrence Iroquoian village sites in southern Quebec, Canada. The traditional ZooMS technique requires destructive analysis of a sample, which can be problematic when dealing with artefacts. Here we instead extracted proteins from the plastic bags in which the points had been stored. ZooMS analysis revealed hitherto unexpected species, notably black bear ( Ursus americanus ) and human ( Homo sapiens sapiens ), used in point manufacture. These surprising results (confirmed through genomic sequencing) highlight the importance of advancing biomolecular research in artefact studies. Furthermore, they unexpectedly and exceptionally allow us to identify and explore the tangible, material traces of the symbolic relationship between bears and humans, central to past and present Iroquoian cosmology and mythology.

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/s41598-019-47299-x

Cites

1 of 1 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?

  • The bag extraction approach revealed a diversity of species, including bear, human, and deer.

    “revealing a diversity of species, including bear, human, and deer”

    From Ancient protein analysis in archaeology (2021) · cites this paper as [165]

  • ZooMS extractions performed on storage bags rather than the objects themselves resulted in taxonomic identifications of bone artifacts.

    “Here, ZooMS extractions were performed on the bags the objects were stored in, rather than the objects themselves, as friction contact from the plastic with the object allowed loose collagen molecules to be separated from the bone point. This novel approach resulted in taxonomic identifications of these bone artifacts”

    From Ancient protein analysis in archaeology (2021) · cites this paper as [165]

  • McGrath et al. developed and applied a nondestructive sampling technique to worked bone points from Iroquoian village sites in southern Quebec.

    “McGrath et al. (165) developed and applied a nondestructive sampling technique to worked bone points from Iroquoian village sites in southern Quebec.”

    From Ancient protein analysis in archaeology (2021) · cites this paper as [165]

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 54

  1. Latour, B. Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. (Oxford university press, 2005). · DOI · Paper page
  2. Hamilakis, Y. & Overton, N. J. A manifesto for a social zooarchaeology: swans and other beings in the Mesolithic. Archaeological Dialogues 20, 111–136 (2013). · DOI
  3. Anderson, K. A walk on the wild side: a critical geography of domestication. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 21, 463–485 (1997). · DOI
  4. Hallowell, A. I. Bear ceremonialism in the Northern Hemisphere. Am. Anthropol. 28, 1–175 (1926). · DOI
  5. Willerslev, R. Not animal, not not-animal: hunting, imitation and empathetic knowledge among the Siberian Yukaghirs. J. R. Anthropol. Inst. 10, 629–652 (2004). · DOI
  6. Hill, E. Animals as Agents: Hunting Ritual and Relational Ontologies in Prehistoric Alaska and Chukotka. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 21, 407–426 (2011). · DOI
  7. Guenther, M. ‘Therefore their parts resemble humans, for they feel that they are people’ Ontological flux in San myth, cosmology and belief. Hunter Gatherer Research 1, 277–315 (2015). · DOI
  8. Peres, T. M. & Altman, H. The magic of improbable appendages: Deer antler objects in the archaeological record of the American South. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2017.10.028 (2017). · DOI
  9. Comba, E. Amerindian Cosmologies and European Prehistoric Cave Art: Reasons for and Usefulness of a Comparison. Arts Health 3, 1–14 (2013).
  10. Knecht, H. Projectile Points of Bone, Antler, and Stone. In Projectile Technology 191–212 (Springer US, 1997). · DOI
  11. Hurcombe, L. Archaeological Artefacts as Material Culture. (Routledge, 2014). · DOI
  12. LeFebvre, M. J. & Sharpe, A. E. Contemporary Challenges in Zooarchaeological Specimen Identification. In Zooarchaeology in Practice 35–57 (Springer, Cham, 2018). · DOI
  13. Bello, S. M., Parfitt, S. A. & Stringer, C. B. Earliest directly-dated human skull-cups. PLoS One 6, e17026 (2011). · DOI
  14. Fiddyment, S. et al. Animal origin of 13th-century uterine vellum revealed using noninvasive peptide fingerprinting. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112, 15066–15071 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  15. Gates St-Pierre, C., Boisvert, M.-E. & Chapdelaine, M. L’étude des maisonnées iroquoiennes à travers l’analyse de leur industrie osseuse: le cas des Iroquoiens du Saint-Laurent de la région de Saint-Anicet, au Québec. Palethnologie 8, 100–114 (2016).
  16. Gates St-Pierre, C. Les pointes en os biseautées des Iroquoiens. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 39 (2015).
  17. Buckley, M., Collins, M., Thomas-Oates, J. & Wilson, J. C. Species identification by analysis of bone collagen using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionisation time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 23, 3843–3854 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  18. Stewart, J. R. M., Allen, R. B., Jones, A. K. G., Penkman, K. E. H. & Collins, M. J. ZooMS: making eggshell visible in the archaeological record. J. Archaeol. Sci. 40, 1797–1804 (2013/4). · DOI · Paper page
  19. Buckley, M. et al. Species identification of archaeological marine mammals using collagen fingerprinting. J. Archaeol. Sci. 41, 631–641 (2014). · DOI
  20. Welker, F. et al. Ancient proteins resolve the evolutionary history of Darwin’s South American ungulates. Nature, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14249 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  21. Buckley, M., Harvey, V. L. & Chamberlain, A. T. Species identification and decay assessment of Late Pleistocene fragmentary vertebrate remains from Pin Hole Cave (Creswell Crags, UK) using collagen fingerprinting. Boreas, https://doi.org/10.1111/bor.12225 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  22. Welker, F. et al. Palaeoproteomic evidence identifies archaic hominins associated with the Châtelperronian at the Grotte du Renne. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 113, 11162–11167 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  23. Welker, F., Soressi, M., Rendu, W., Hublin, J.-J. & Collins, M. J. Using ZooMS to identify fragmentary bone from the late Middle/Early Upper Palaeolithic sequence of Les Cottés, France. J. Archaeol. Sci. 54, 279–286 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  24. Brown, S. et al. Identification of a new hominin bone from Denisova Cave, Siberia using collagen fingerprinting and mitochondrial DNA analysis. Sci. Rep. 6, 23559 (2016).
  25. Coutu, A. N., Whitelaw, G., le Roux, P. & Sealy, J. Earliest evidence for the ivory trade in southern Africa: Isotopic and ZooMS analysis of seventh–tenth century AD ivory from KwaZulu-Natal. African Archaeological Review (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  26. Seabury, C. M. et al. Genome-wide polymorphism and comparative analyses in the white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus): a model for conservation genomics. PLoS One 6, e15811 (2011). · DOI
  27. Puckett, E. E., Etter, P. D., Johnson, E. A. & Eggert, L. S. Phylogeographic Analyses of American Black Bears (Ursus americanus) Suggest Four Glacial Refugia and Complex Patterns of Postglacial Admixture. Mol. Biol. Evol. 32, 2338–2350 (2015). · DOI
  28. Li, J. Z. et al. Worldwide human relationships inferred from genome-wide patterns of variation. Science 319, 1100–1104 (2008). · DOI
  29. Lévi-Strauss, C. Totemism Translated from the French by Rodney Needham. (Beacon Press, 1963).
  30. Berres, T. E., Stothers, D. M. & Mather, D. Bear Imagery and Ritual in Northeast North America: An Update and Assessment of A. Irving Hallowell’s Work. MidCont. J. Archaeol. 29, 5–42 (2004). · DOI
  31. Smith, E. A. Myths of the Iroquois. (US Government Printing Office, 1883). · DOI
  32. Cornplanter, J. J. & Henricks, M. N. P. Legends of the Longhouse. 24, (JB Lippincott, 1938).
  33. Tooker, E. An Ethnography of the Huron Indians, 1615–1649. (Syracuse University Press, 1991).
  34. Trigger, B. G. Children of Aataentsic: A History of the Huron People to 1660. (McGill-Queen’s Press, Kingston and Montreal, 1987). · DOI
  35. Clément, D. Le rapport Homme-Animal chez les Amérindiens du Mexique. Vol. 2: Les thèmes. Rapport de recherche thématique No 14. (Musée de la civilisation, Quebec City, 1993).
  36. Betts, M. W. The Mackenzie Inuit Whale Bone Industry: Raw Material, Tool Manufacture, Scheduling, and Trade. Arctic 60, 129–144 (2007).
  37. Birch, J. Coalescence and conflict in Iroquoian Ontario. Archaeological Review from Cambridge 25, 29–48 (2010).
  38. Chacon, R. J. & Dye, D. H. The Taking and Displaying of Human Body Parts as Trophies by Amerindians. (Springer, Boston, MA, 2007). · DOI
  39. Jamieson, J. B. An Examination of Prisoner-Sacrifice and Cannibalism at the St. Lawrence Iroquoian Roebuck Site. Canadian Journal of Archaeology/Journal Canadien d’Archéologie 7, 159–175 (1983).
  40. Jenkins, T. Contexts, Needs, and Social Messaging: Situating Iroquoian Human Bone Artifacts in Southern Ontario, Canada. in Theoretical Approaches to Analysis and Interpretation of Commingled Human Remains (ed. Osterholtz, A. J.) 139–183 (Springer International Publishing, 2016). · DOI
  41. Strohalm, M., Hassman, M., Kosata, B. & Kodícek, M. mMass data miner: an open source alternative for mass spectrometric data analysis. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 22, 905–908 (2008). · DOI
  42. Buckley, M. & Kansa, S. W. Collagen fingerprinting of archaeological bone and teeth remains from Domuztepe, South Eastern Turkey. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 3, 271–280 (2011). · DOI
  43. Kirby, D. P., Buckley, M., Promise, E., Trauger, S. A. & Holdcraft, T. R. Identification of collagen-based materials in cultural heritage. Analyst 138, 4849–4858 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  44. Yang, D. Y., Eng, B., Waye, J. S., Dudar, J. C. & Saunders, S. R. Technical note: improved DNA extraction from ancient bones using silica-based spin columns. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 105, 539–543 (1998). · DOI
  45. Yang, D. Y., Liu, L., Chen, X. & Speller, C. F. Wild or domesticated: DNA analysis of ancient water buffalo remains from north China. J. Archaeol. Sci. 35, 2778–2785 (2008). · DOI
  46. Krause, J. et al. Mitochondrial genomes reveal an explosive radiation of extinct and extant bears near the Miocene-Pliocene boundary. BMC Evol. Biol. 8, 220 (2008). · DOI
  47. Stone, K. D. & Cook, J. A. Phylogeography of black bears (Ursus americanus) of the Pacific Northwest. Can. J. Zool. 78, 1218–1223 (2000). · DOI
  48. Cronin, M. A., McDonough, M. M., Huynh, H. M. & Baker, R. J. Genetic relationships of North American bears (Ursus) inferred from amplified fragment length polymorphisms and mitochondrial DNA sequences. Can. J. Zool. 91, 626–634 (2013). · DOI
  49. Meyer, M. & Kircher, M. Illumina sequencing library preparation for highly multiplexed target capture and sequencing. Cold Spring Harb. Protoc. 2010, db.prot5448 (2010). · DOI
  50. Fortes, G. G. & Paijmans, J. L. A. Analysis of Whole Mitogenomes from Ancient Samples. Methods Mol. Biol. 1347, 179–195 (2015). · DOI
  51. Martin, M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet.journal 17, 10–12 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  52. Skoglund, P., Storå, J., Götherström, A. & Jakobsson, M. Accurate sex identification of ancient human remains using DNA shotgun sequencing. J. Archaeol. Sci. 40, 4477–4482 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  53. Vianello, D. et al. HAPLOFIND: a New method for high-throughput mtDNA Haplogroup assignment. Hum. Mutat. 34, 1189–1194 (2013). · DOI
  54. Wang, C., Zhan, X., Liang, L., Abecasis, G. R. & Lin, X. Improved ancestry estimation for both genotyping and sequencing data using projection procrustes analysis and genotype imputation. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 96, 926–937 (2015). · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
McGrath, K., Rowsell, K., Gates St-Pierre, C., Tedder, A., Foody, G., Roberts, C., Speller, C., & Collins, M.
ORCID
Venue
Scientific Reports
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2019-07-30
Volume
9
Issue
1
ISSN
2045-2322
DOI
10.1038/s41598-019-47299-x
PMC
PMC6667708
Cited by
103
References
1
Language
en
Licence
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (104911/Z/14/)
  • Gouvernement du Canada | Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (430-2014-00558)
  • Leverhulme Trust (DNRF128)

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