Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35390045›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Every contact leaves a trace: Documenting contamination in lithic residue studies at the Middle Palaeolithic sites of Lusakert Cave 1 (Armenia) and Crvena Stijena (Montenegro).

Ellery Frahm, Daniel S Adler, Boris Gasparyan, Bing Luo, Carolina Mallol, Goran Pajović, Gilbert B Tostevin, Benik Yeritsyan, Gilliane Monnier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Ellery FrahmDepartment of Anthropology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7858-3523
Daniel S AdlerDepartment of Anthropology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut, United States of America.
Boris GasparyanInstitute of Archaeology and Ethnography, National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia, Yerevan, Armenia.
Bing LuoCharacterization Facility, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of America.
Carolina MallolDepartamento de Prehistoria, Antropología e Historia Antigua, Universidad de La Laguna, La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain.
Goran PajovićNational Museum of Montenegro, Cetinje, Montenegro.
Gilbert B TostevinDepartment of Anthropology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of America.
Benik YeritsyanInstitute of Archaeology and Ethnography, National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia, Yerevan, Armenia.
Gilliane MonnierDepartment of Anthropology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Investigations of organic lithic micro-residues have, over the last decade, shifted from entirely morphological observations using visible-light microscopy to compositional ones using scanning electron microscopy and Fourier-transform infrared microspectroscopy, providing a seemingly objective chemical basis for residue identifications. Contamination, though, remains a problem that can affect these results. Modern contaminants, accumulated during the post-excavation lives of artifacts, are pervasive, subtle, and even "invisible" (unlisted ingredients in common lab products). Ancient contamination is a second issue. The aim of residue analysis is to recognize residues related to use, but other types of residues can also accumulate on artifacts. Caves are subject to various taphonomic forces and organic inputs, and use-related residues can degrade into secondary compounds. This organic "background noise" must be taken into consideration. Here we show that residue contamination is more pervasive than is often appreciated, as revealed by our studies of Middle Palaeolithic artifacts from two sites: Lusakert Cave 1 in Armenia and Crvena Stijena in Montenegro. First, we explain how artifacts from Lusakert Cave 1, despite being handled following specialized protocols, were tainted by a modern-day contaminant from an unanticipated source: a release agent used inside the zip-top bags that are ubiquitous in the field and lab. Second, we document that, when non-artifact "controls" are studied alongside artifacts from Crvena Stijena, comparisons reveal that organic residues are adhered to both, indicating that they are prevalent throughout the sediments and not necessarily related to use. We provide suggestions for reducing contamination and increasing the reliability of residue studies. Ultimately, we propose that archaeologists working in the field of residue studies must start with the null hypothesis that miniscule organic residues reflect contamination, either ancient or modern, and systematically proceed to rule out all possible contaminants before interpreting them as evidence of an artifact's use in the distant past.

Indexed as

ArchaeologyCavesArmeniaMontenegroReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID35390045
PMCPMC8989205

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.