ArticleRoyal Society open science2019
Not a limitless resource: ethics and guidelines for destructive sampling of archaeofaunal remains.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Beginner's Guide for Using Bone in Marine Mammal Research.Integrative and comparative biology · 2026Guideline
- Bony labyrinth taxonomic identification and long-term evolution of livestock in the Southwest and Central Asia.Royal Society open science · 2026Article
- Review
- Review
- Animal Species and Identity Testing: Developments, Challenges, and Applications to Non-Human Forensics.Genes · 2025Review
- Clothomics: a practical guide to understand the opportunities and challenges of omics-based methods in archaeological cloth research.NPJ heritage science · 2025Review
- Ethics and applications of isotope analysis in archaeology.American journal of biological anthropology · 2025Review
- Article
- Article
- Developing the Protocol Infrastructure for DNA Sequencing Natural History Collections.Biodiversity data journal · 2023Article
- Touching the (almost) untouchable: a minimally invasive workflow for microbiological and biomolecular analyses of cultural heritage objects.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Size and shape of the semicircular canal of the inner ear: A new marker of pig domestication?Journal of experimental zoology. Part B, Molecular and developmental evolution · 2022Article
- Review
- Ethical considerations and publishing in human bioarcheology.American journal of biological anthropology · 2022Article
- Ancient Human Genomes and Environmental DNA from the Cement Attaching 2,000-Year-Old Head Lice Nits.Molecular biology and evolution · 2022Article
- Darwinian genomics and diversity in the tree of life.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Article
- Collagen fingerprinting traces the introduction of caprines to island Eastern Africa.Royal Society open science · 2021Article
- Community-curated and standardised metadata of published ancient metagenomic samples with AncientMetagenomeDir.Scientific data · 2021Article
- Bone need not remain an elephant in the room for radiocarbon dating.Royal Society open science · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the advent of ancient DNA, as well as other methods such as isotope analysis, destructive sampling of archaeofaunal remains has increased much faster than the effort to collect and curate them. While there has been considerable discussion regarding the ethics of destructive sampling and analysis of human remains, this dialogue has not extended to archaeofaunal material. Here we address this gap and discuss the ethical challenges surrounding destructive sampling of materials from archaeofaunal collections. We suggest ways of mitigating the negative aspects of destructive sampling and present step-by-step guidelines aimed at relevant stakeholders, including scientists, holding institutions and scientific journals. Our suggestions are in most cases easily implemented without significant increases in project costs, but with clear long-term benefits in the preservation and use of zooarchaeological material.
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.