Screening archaeological bone for palaeogenetic and palaeoproteomic studies

Ioannis Kontopoulos; Kirsty Penkman; Victoria E. Mullin; Laura Winkelbach; Martina Unterländer; Amelie Scheu; Susanne Kreutzer; Henrik B. Hansen; Ashot Margaryan; Matthew D. Teasdale; Birgit Gehlen; Martin Street; Niels Lynnerup; Ioannis Liritzis; Adamantios Sampson; Christina Papageorgopoulou; Morten E. Allentoft; Joachim Burger; Daniel G. Bradley; Matthew J. Collins

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0235146

Screening archaeological bone for palaeogenetic and palaeoproteomic studies

Ioannis Kontopoulos, Kirsty Penkman, Victoria E. Mullin, Laura Winkelbach, Martina Unterländer, Amelie Scheu, Susanne Kreutzer, Henrik B. Hansen, Ashot Margaryan, Matthew D. Teasdale, Birgit Gehlen, Martin Street, Niels Lynnerup, Ioannis Liritzis, Adamantios Sampson, Christina Papageorgopoulou, Morten E. Allentoft, Joachim Burger, Daniel G. Bradley, Matthew J. Collins

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

The recovery and analysis of ancient DNA and protein from archaeological bone is time-consuming and expensive to carry out, while it involves the partial or complete destruction of valuable or rare specimens. The fields of palaeogenetic and palaeoproteomic research would benefit greatly from techniques that can assess the molecular quality prior to sampling. To be relevant, such screening methods should be effective, minimally-destructive, and rapid. This study reports results based on spectroscopic (Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy in attenuated total reflectance [FTIR-ATR]; n = 266), palaeoproteomic (collagen content; n = 226), and palaeogenetic (endogenous DNA content; n = 88) techniques. We establish thresholds for three different FTIR indices, a) the infrared splitting factor [IRSF] that assesses relative changes in bioapatite crystals' size and homogeneity; b) the carbonate-to-phosphate [C/P] ratio as a relative measure of carbonate content in bioapatite crystals; and c) the amide-to-phosphate ratio [Am/P] for assessing the relative organic content preserved in bone. These thresholds are both extremely reliable and easy to apply for the successful and rapid distinction between well- and poorly-preserved specimens. This is a milestone for choosing appropriate samples prior to genomic and collagen analyses, with important implications for biomolecular archaeology and palaeontology.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	e0235146
Journal	PLoS ONE
Volume	15
Issue number	6
Early online date	25 Jun 2020
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235146
Publication status	E-pub ahead of print - 25 Jun 2020

Bibliographical note

This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details

Access to Document

10.1371/journal.pone.0235146

Kontopoulos et al. 2020, Screening archaeological bone for palaeogenetic and palaeoproteomic studies
This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details
Accepted author manuscript, 1.98 MB
Kontopoulos et al 2020 Supporting information
This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details
Accepted author manuscript, 1.48 MB

Cite this

Kontopoulos, I., Penkman, K., Mullin, V. E., Winkelbach, L., Unterländer, M., Scheu, A., Kreutzer, S., Hansen, H. B., Margaryan, A., Teasdale, M. D., Gehlen, B., Street, M., Lynnerup, N., Liritzis, I., Sampson, A., Papageorgopoulou, C., Allentoft, M. E., Burger, J., Bradley, D. G., & Collins, M. J. (2020). Screening archaeological bone for palaeogenetic and palaeoproteomic studies. PLoS ONE, 15(6), e0235146. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235146

@article{c5bd025276734c7aaa4fd5877f2f860a,

title = "Screening archaeological bone for palaeogenetic and palaeoproteomic studies",

abstract = "The recovery and analysis of ancient DNA and protein from archaeological bone is time-consuming and expensive to carry out, while it involves the partial or complete destruction of valuable or rare specimens. The fields of palaeogenetic and palaeoproteomic research would benefit greatly from techniques that can assess the molecular quality prior to sampling. To be relevant, such screening methods should be effective, minimally-destructive, and rapid. This study reports results based on spectroscopic (Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy in attenuated total reflectance [FTIR-ATR]; n = 266), palaeoproteomic (collagen content; n = 226), and palaeogenetic (endogenous DNA content; n = 88) techniques. We establish thresholds for three different FTIR indices, a) the infrared splitting factor [IRSF] that assesses relative changes in bioapatite crystals' size and homogeneity; b) the carbonate-to-phosphate [C/P] ratio as a relative measure of carbonate content in bioapatite crystals; and c) the amide-to-phosphate ratio [Am/P] for assessing the relative organic content preserved in bone. These thresholds are both extremely reliable and easy to apply for the successful and rapid distinction between well- and poorly-preserved specimens. This is a milestone for choosing appropriate samples prior to genomic and collagen analyses, with important implications for biomolecular archaeology and palaeontology.",

author = "Ioannis Kontopoulos and Kirsty Penkman and Mullin, {Victoria E.} and Laura Winkelbach and Martina Unterl{\"a}nder and Amelie Scheu and Susanne Kreutzer and Hansen, {Henrik B.} and Ashot Margaryan and Teasdale, {Matthew D.} and Birgit Gehlen and Martin Street and Niels Lynnerup and Ioannis Liritzis and Adamantios Sampson and Christina Papageorgopoulou and Allentoft, {Morten E.} and Joachim Burger and Bradley, {Daniel G.} and Collins, {Matthew J.}",

note = "This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher{\textquoteright}s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details",

year = "2020",

month = jun,

day = "25",

doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0235146",

language = "English",

volume = "15",

pages = "e0235146",

journal = "PLoS ONE",

issn = "1932-6203",

publisher = "Public Library of Science",

number = "6",

}

Kontopoulos, I, Penkman, K, Mullin, VE, Winkelbach, L, Unterländer, M, Scheu, A, Kreutzer, S, Hansen, HB, Margaryan, A, Teasdale, MD, Gehlen, B, Street, M, Lynnerup, N, Liritzis, I, Sampson, A, Papageorgopoulou, C, Allentoft, ME, Burger, J, Bradley, DG & Collins, MJ 2020, 'Screening archaeological bone for palaeogenetic and palaeoproteomic studies', PLoS ONE, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. e0235146. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235146

TY - JOUR

T1 - Screening archaeological bone for palaeogenetic and palaeoproteomic studies

AU - Kontopoulos, Ioannis

AU - Penkman, Kirsty

AU - Mullin, Victoria E.

AU - Winkelbach, Laura

AU - Unterländer, Martina

AU - Scheu, Amelie

AU - Kreutzer, Susanne

AU - Hansen, Henrik B.

AU - Margaryan, Ashot

AU - Teasdale, Matthew D.

AU - Gehlen, Birgit

AU - Street, Martin

AU - Lynnerup, Niels

AU - Liritzis, Ioannis

AU - Sampson, Adamantios

AU - Papageorgopoulou, Christina

AU - Allentoft, Morten E.

AU - Burger, Joachim

AU - Bradley, Daniel G.

AU - Collins, Matthew J.

N1 - This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details

PY - 2020/6/25

Y1 - 2020/6/25

N2 - The recovery and analysis of ancient DNA and protein from archaeological bone is time-consuming and expensive to carry out, while it involves the partial or complete destruction of valuable or rare specimens. The fields of palaeogenetic and palaeoproteomic research would benefit greatly from techniques that can assess the molecular quality prior to sampling. To be relevant, such screening methods should be effective, minimally-destructive, and rapid. This study reports results based on spectroscopic (Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy in attenuated total reflectance [FTIR-ATR]; n = 266), palaeoproteomic (collagen content; n = 226), and palaeogenetic (endogenous DNA content; n = 88) techniques. We establish thresholds for three different FTIR indices, a) the infrared splitting factor [IRSF] that assesses relative changes in bioapatite crystals' size and homogeneity; b) the carbonate-to-phosphate [C/P] ratio as a relative measure of carbonate content in bioapatite crystals; and c) the amide-to-phosphate ratio [Am/P] for assessing the relative organic content preserved in bone. These thresholds are both extremely reliable and easy to apply for the successful and rapid distinction between well- and poorly-preserved specimens. This is a milestone for choosing appropriate samples prior to genomic and collagen analyses, with important implications for biomolecular archaeology and palaeontology.

AB - The recovery and analysis of ancient DNA and protein from archaeological bone is time-consuming and expensive to carry out, while it involves the partial or complete destruction of valuable or rare specimens. The fields of palaeogenetic and palaeoproteomic research would benefit greatly from techniques that can assess the molecular quality prior to sampling. To be relevant, such screening methods should be effective, minimally-destructive, and rapid. This study reports results based on spectroscopic (Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy in attenuated total reflectance [FTIR-ATR]; n = 266), palaeoproteomic (collagen content; n = 226), and palaeogenetic (endogenous DNA content; n = 88) techniques. We establish thresholds for three different FTIR indices, a) the infrared splitting factor [IRSF] that assesses relative changes in bioapatite crystals' size and homogeneity; b) the carbonate-to-phosphate [C/P] ratio as a relative measure of carbonate content in bioapatite crystals; and c) the amide-to-phosphate ratio [Am/P] for assessing the relative organic content preserved in bone. These thresholds are both extremely reliable and easy to apply for the successful and rapid distinction between well- and poorly-preserved specimens. This is a milestone for choosing appropriate samples prior to genomic and collagen analyses, with important implications for biomolecular archaeology and palaeontology.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85087099665&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0235146

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0235146

M3 - Article

C2 - 32584871

AN - SCOPUS:85087099665

SN - 1932-6203

VL - 15

SP - e0235146

JO - PLoS ONE

JF - PLoS ONE

IS - 6

ER -

Screening archaeological bone for palaeogenetic and palaeoproteomic studies

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Access to Document

Other files and links

Cite this