ArticleScientific reports2019
Identifying Archaeological Bone via Non-Destructive ZooMS and the Materiality of Symbolic Expression: Examples from Iroquoian Bone Points.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
28 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterization of raw material in textile bone instruments from the capital of the Roman Province of Lusitania (Mérida, Spain).Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Non-destructive histomorphological identification of Late Pleistocene burned bone fragments using synchrotron radiation X-ray CT at SPring-8.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Minimally Destructive Radiocarbon Dating of Bone.Rapid communications in mass spectrometry : RCM · 2026Article
- Molecular and zooarchaeological identification of 5000 year old whale-bone harpoons in coastal Brazil.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Late Paleolithic whale bone tools reveal human and whale ecology in the Bay of Biscay.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Ethics and applications of isotope analysis in archaeology.American journal of biological anthropology · 2025Review
- Clothomics: a practical guide to understand the opportunities and challenges of omics-based methods in archaeological cloth research.NPJ heritage science · 2025Review
- Cervidae antlers exploited to manufacture prehistoric tools and hunting implements as a reliable source of ancient DNA.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Increasing sustainability in palaeoproteomics by optimizing digestion times for large-scale archaeological bone analyses.iScience · 2024Article
- Use of hare bone for the manufacture of a Clovis bead.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Uncovering the Holocene roots of contemporary disease-scapes: bringing archaeology into One Health.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Review
- A double-blind comparison of morphological and collagen fingerprinting (ZooMS) methods of skeletal identifications from Paleolithic contexts.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Comparing extraction method efficiency for high-throughput palaeoproteomic bone species identification.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Paleoproteomics.Chemical reviews · 2022Review
- Peptide mass fingerprinting of preserved collagen in archaeological fish bones for the identification of flatfish in European waters.Royal Society open science · 2022Article
- Review
- A primer for ZooMS applications in archaeology.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Review
- The effect of eraser sampling for proteomic analysis on Palaeolithic bone surface microtopography.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Meta-proteomic analysis of the Shandrin mammoth by EVA technology and high-resolution mass spectrometry: what is its gut microbiota telling us?Amino acids · 2021Article
- Palaeoproteomics confirm earliest domesticated sheep in southern Africa ca. 2000 BP.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.