[Bonetools] Help to identify the raw material of an artefact (part 2)

[Sonia O'Connor]

Dear Miriam,

Steve is right. The sample size does depend on the state of protein preservation but we have had good results with the eraser method on worked bone objects. However, ZooMS is a minimally destructive technique compared to aDNA sampling.  Although I would normally not do identifications from photographs alone, the features on your bone object leave me in no doubt that it is cetacean bone (do contact me directly if you want a more detailed account on which this identification is based for publication). It is possible that  ZooMS could provide you with additional information i.e. possible species. The York team is very experienced in proteomics analysis and aDNA and I am sure they will advise you well.

Three points to consider:

1 Biochemical and physical preservation are two different things. Sometimes, even with a big sample, the preservation of the collagen is not good enough to provide an ID, even when the preservation of the gross morphology, macro and micro structural evidence is good enough to provide a positive visual identification. This may turn out to be the case with your material.

2 If the collagen is not well enough preserved to give a useful result with ZooMS, then it is unlikely that you would get any meaningful result from DNA at all (you agree with this Steve??).

3 ZooMS (or DNA for that matter) may be able to tell you that an object comes from an elephant, a whale or a deer, but it cannot tell you if you are dealing with bone, ivory or antler.  It is together the two techniques are most powerful. Visual identification may fully answer your questions and, if not, it will certainly help you frame the questions these biochemical analytical techniques might then answer.

Hope this all helps

Sonia

Dr Sonia O'Connor PhD FSA FIIC ACR Honorary Visiting Fellow, University of York
Post-doctoral Researcher
Archaeological Sciences
Division of AGES,
University of Bradford
Bradford, West Yorkshire, BD7 1DP, UK

tel 01274 23 6498

From: Bonetools [mailto:bonetools-bounces at listserv.niif.hu] On Behalf Of Steve Ashby
Sent: 24 February 2016 16:17
To: Mailing list for archaeologists of the research group for the study of object and waste of bone, antler. ivory and horn.
Subject: Re: [Bonetools] Help to identify the raw material of an artefact (part 2)

You may need more than the eraser method, but samples still tiny.

Steve

On Wednesday, 24 February 2016, Sonia O'Connor <S.Oconnor at bradford.ac.uk<mailto:S.Oconnor at bradford.ac.uk>> wrote:
Species identification by ZooMS. This is done by fingerprinting the peptides that make up the collagen protein using mass-spectrometry. Collagen is more likely to survive than DNA, is less effected by contamination and requires a much smaller sample (it is often not possible to see by eye where the sample has been removed, which is done using an eraser). It should be able to confirm the ID as cetacean but may not be able to give you the exact species. The team at  BioACH at the University of York have had a lot of success with.  You need to contact Dr Matthew Collins in the first instance matthew.collins at york.ac.uk<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','matthew.collins at york.ac.uk');>

All the best,

Sonia

Dr Sonia O'Connor PhD FSA FIIC ACR Honorary Visiting Fellow, University of York
Post-doctoral Researcher
Archaeological Sciences
Division of AGES,
University of Bradford
Bradford, West Yorkshire, BD7 1DP, UK

tel 01274 23 6498

From: Bonetools [mailto:bonetools-bounces at listserv.niif.hu<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','bonetools-bounces at listserv.niif.hu');>] On Behalf Of Miriam Luciañez Triviño
Sent: 24 February 2016 14:28
To: bonetools at listserv.niif.hu<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','bonetools at listserv.niif.hu');>
Subject: [Bonetools] Help to identify the raw material of an artefact (part 2)


Dear all,

I would like to thank you for your suggestions and assessment, especially thank you Sonia for your evaluation. The documentation of this new material increase the number of osseous raw materials worked in this settlement. To have a more sure characterization... Could you suggest me the most suitable (not destructive, if possible) analytical method (or a combination of)?

Thank you very much,

Miriam
--

Miriam Luciañez Triviño
Contrato Predoctoral del Gobierno Vasco

Departamento de Prehistoria y Arqueología
Universidad de Sevilla
María de Padilla s/n. 41004. Sevilla. Spain
Phone: (34) 954 556906
Fax: (34) 954 559920

E-mail: mlucianez at us.es<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mlucianez at us.es');>
http://www.departamento.us.es/dpreyarq/web
http://www.grupo.us.es/atlas


--
Steve Ashby




Dr Steven P Ashby, FSA
Senior Lecturer
Dept of Archaeology
University of York
www.york.ac.uk/archaeology<http://www.york.ac.uk/archaeology>
@uoyarchaeology / @grungeviking
Awards Officer, Finds Research Group
www.frg700-1700.org.uk<http://www.frg700-1700.org.uk>

PLEASE NOTE: I am on research leave.
Student issues to David Orton (david.orton at york.ac.uk<mailto:gill.chitty at york.ac.uk>).
BoS issues to Dr Gill Chitty (gill.chitty at york.ac.uk<mailto:gill.chitty at york.ac.uk>).

Please support families and communities in Langtang, Nepal:  http://www.justgiving.com/langtang-survivors

Please see the University of York's email disclaimer: http://www.york.ac.uk/docs/disclaimer/email.htm


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://listserv.niif.hu/pipermail/bonetools/attachments/20160224/41037224/attachment-0001.html>