Boots on the ground in Africa's ancient DNA ‘revolution’: archaeological perspectives on ethics and best practices

Prendergast, Mary E.; Sawchuk, Elizabeth A.

doi:10.15184/aqy.2018.70

Cited by 70 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To be included in this study, each specimen was required to have at least one ossicle as well as the cochlea of the petrous bone available for comparative analysis. Whenever possible, a petrous bone that had an antimere was chosen (Prendergast and Sawchuk 2018); we did not sample the antimeres in order to preserve them for future analyses.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While use of the cochlea has contributed to the application of ancient DNA research to a growing range of geographic and temporal contexts, it is important to balance analytical goals with the irreparable damage to human skeletal remains that results from destructive analyses (Prendergast and Sawchuk 2018; Sirak and Sedig in press ). Ancient DNA is one of several such analyses that are now widely used in archaeology (others include radiocarbon dating and stable isotope analysis) (Hublin et al 2008; Mays et al 2013; Makarewicz et al 2017; Pinhasi et al 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Human Auditory Ossicles as an Alternative Optimal Source of Ancient DNA

Sirak

Fernandes

Cheronet

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1DNA recovery from ancient human remains has revolutionized our ability to 2 reconstruct the genetic landscape of the past. Ancient DNA research has benefited from the 3 identification of skeletal elements, such as the cochlear part of the osseous inner ear, that 4 provide optimal contexts for DNA preservation; however, the rich genetic information obtained 5 from the cochlea must be counterbalanced against the loss of valuable morphological 6 information caused by its sampling. Motivated by similarities in developmental processes and 7 histological properties between the cochlea and auditory ossicles, we evaluated the efficacy 8 of ossicles as an alternative source of ancient DNA. We demonstrate that ossicles perform 9 comparably to the cochlea in terms of DNA recovery, finding no substantial reduction in data 10 quality, quantity, or authenticity across a range of preservation conditions. Ossicles can be 11 sampled from intact skulls or disarticulated petrous bones without damage to surrounding 12 bone, and we argue that, when available, they should be selected over the cochlea to reduce 13 damage to skeletal integrity. These results identify a second optimal skeletal element for 14 ancient DNA analysis and add to a growing toolkit of sampling methods that help to better 15 preserve skeletal remains for future research while maximizing the likelihood that ancient DNA 16 analysis will produce useable results. 17 18 24 Briggs et al. 2010; Ginolhac et al. 2011; Skoglund et al. 2014) small quantities of degraded 25 DNA. While these methodological advances have contributed to an improvement in the quality 26 and quantity of paleogenomic data obtained from ancient human remains, all ancient DNA 27 4 research fundamentally depends upon access to biological material that has sufficient 28 biomolecular preservation. 29Skeletal tissue (i.e., bone or teeth) is the preferred biological material for human 30 ancient DNA analysis due to its ability to resist post-mortem degradation better than other 31 types of tissues, including skin and hair (Lindahl 1993; Smith et al. 2001 Smith et al. , 2003 Collins et al. 32 2002). Recent research has shown that not all bone elements are equally effective in 33 preserving DNA, however, and has identified the bone encapsulating the cochlea within the 34 petrous pyramid of the temporal bone (referred to henceforth as the 'cochlea') (Gamba et al.35 2014; Pinhasi et al. 2015), as well as the cementum layer in teeth roots (Damgaard et al. 2015; 36 Hansen et al. 2017) as especially DNA-rich parts of the skeleton. The use of these skeletal 37 elements that act as repositories for the long-term survival of DNA has proven to be particularly 38 important for the analysis of biological samples recovered from regions where high 39 temperatures and/or humidity increase the rate of molecular degradation and result in low 40 concentrations of damaged DNA with reduced molecular complexity (e.g., Broushaki et al. 41 2016; Lazaridis et al. 2016; Schuenemann et al. 2017; Skoglund et al. 2017; Fregel e...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Auditory Ossicles as an Alternative Optimal Source of Ancient DNA

Sirak

Fernandes

Cheronet

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This, Caraher contends, would help researchers to recognize their role in the process of interpretation and help make the discipline more humane, more open, and most importantly more inclusive and ethically sustainable. These are all concerns that have to be carefully considered in the study of ancient DNA (Fossheim 2017;Prendergast & Sawchuk 2018;Tringham 2018).…”

Section: Slow Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Slow science for fast archaeology

Marila

2019

CSA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This contribution contends that, with the recent genetic revolution, archaeology has reached a new scientism, a development that could lead to fewer opportunities in the epistemology of archaeology to think difference. Drawing from discussions in slow science and the related idea that scientific importance is a matter of concern rather than fact, the contribution proposes that archaeologists start to cultivate methods of deceleration. In particular, as a measure to mitigate the epistemological effects of archaeology’s methodological acceleration, the contribution suggests the publishing of personal hunches, failed hypotheses, and so forth in addition to research results, and a cultivation of historical awareness in order to better anticipate possible epistemological effects of pursuing conflicting research interests.

show abstract

“…There have also been a number of articles dealing with concerns regard ing terminology (Eisenmann et al 2018), ethics and protocols of sampling, or their lack thereof (Prendergast & Sawchuk 2018), or all of the above (see The SAA Archaeological Record (2019), especially the contributions of John Edward Terrell and John Hawks). Other analysis focused on the 'business like philosophy' that seems to frame the projects of several large research groups, such as those from Germany, Denmark or the USA (Jones 2019).…”

Section: A Cambridge Workhop and The Root-seekersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who are we as historical beings? Shaping identities in light of the archaeogenetics ‘revolution’

Ion

2019

CSA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a human fundamental need to know who we are and where we come from. In an age when myths, legends and family memories are starting to fade or become obsolete, science is brought in to fill the gaps and answer these questions. This article introduces a special theme section dedicated to critical reflections on the relationship between the disciplines of archaeology and archaeogenetics. It gives a summary of the ‘Can science accommodate multiple ontologies? The genetics revolution and archaeological theory’ workshop held in Cambridge 2018, followed by an introduction of the papers in this theme section. Lastly, I evaluate archaeogenetic narratives in terms of their target audience, knowledge obtained (or not) and future directions.

show abstract

Boots on the ground in Africa's ancient DNA ‘revolution’: archaeological perspectives on ethics and best practices

Cited by 70 publications

References 40 publications

Human Auditory Ossicles as an Alternative Optimal Source of Ancient DNA

Human Auditory Ossicles as an Alternative Optimal Source of Ancient DNA

Slow science for fast archaeology

Who are we as historical beings? Shaping identities in light of the archaeogenetics ‘revolution’

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About