Zooarchaeology by Mass Spectrometry (ZooMS) Collagen Fingerprinting for the Species Identification of Archaeological Bone Fragments
Archaeological bone assemblages are almost always dominated by high proportions of fragmentary remains rendering them unidentifiable by morphological analysis. To overcome this, a number of alternative techniques of species identification have been proposed, with one of the most promising of these methods being the use of protein fingerprinting. Amongst the most abundant proteins in vertebrates, collagen is one of the most dominant biomolecules in the archaeological record due to its persistence in ancient bone. Despite its highly-conserved triple-helical structure, which is important for a range of functions, the collagen molecule possesses enough amino acid sequence variation to be able to discriminate between closely related and morphologically similar species, such as sheep and goat. Through the use of soft-ionization mass spectrometry, the collagen that survives for thousands, and in some cases millions, of years can be fingerprinted to yield taxonomic identifications of archaeological bone. The technique has been applied to a wide range of fragmentary and/or morphologically similar taxa from various archaeological and paleontological assemblages. In response to the most commonly asked question of ZooMS, this study investigates the taxonomic resolution achievable using collagen fingerprinting across a range of vertebrate groups in order to allow potential users a means to estimate the applicability of the technique to different archaeofaunal assemblages worldwide. Given the scope of this volume, it will also consider the practicalities of ZooMS protein fingerprint analyses, including sampling issues and amenability to high-throughput analyses of large assemblages and subsequent curation of such collections.
KeywordsPeptide mass fingerprinting Archaeological proteins Species identification Fragmentary bone Taxonomic resolution
The author would like to thank the Royal Society for fellowship funding, the University of Manchester’s Faculty of Life Sciences Proteomics Core Facility for access to instrumentation, the University of Sheffield’s Department of Archaeology for access to samples and Prof. Andrew Chamberlain as well as the peer reviewers for reading and commenting on early drafts of this chapter.
- Betancur-R, R., Broughton, R. E., Wiley, E. O., Carpenter, K., López, J. A., Li, C., et al. (2013). The tree of life and a new classification of bony fishes. PLOS Currents. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/currents.tol.53ba26640df0ccaee75bb165c8c26288.
- Bossuyt, F., & Roelants, K. (2009). Frogs and toads (Anura). In S. B. Hedges & S. Kumar (Eds.), The timetree of life (pp. 357–364). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Buckley, M., Harvey, V. L., & Chamberlain, A. T. (2017). Species identification and decay assessment of Late Pleistocene fragmentary vertebrate remains from Pin Hole Cave (Creswell Crags, UK) using collagen fingerprinting. Boreas. doi: 10.1111/bor.12225.
- Langergraber, K. E., Prüfer, K., Rowney, C., Boesch, C., Crockford, C., Fawcett, K., et al. (2012). Generation times in wild chimpanzees and gorillas suggest earlier divergence times in great ape and human evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(39), 15716–15721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Miyauchi, Y., & Kimura, S. (1990). Characterization of an alpha3 chain from carp skin type I collagen. Bulletin of the Japan Society for the Science of Fish, 35(5), 456–459.Google Scholar
- Morvan-Dubois, G., Le Guellec, D., Garrone, R., Zylberberg, L., & Bonnaud, L. (2003). Phylogenetic analysis of vertebrate fibrillar collagen locates the position of zebrafish α3 (I) and suggests an evolutionary link between collagen α chains and Hox clusters. Journal of Molecular Evolution, 57(5), 501–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pereiraa, S. L., & Bakera, A. J. (2009). Waterfowl and gamefowl (Galloanserae). In S. B. Hedges & S. Kumar (Eds.), The timetree of life (pp. 415–418). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Shedlock, A. M., & Edwards, S. V. (2009). Amniotes (Amniota). In S. B. Hedges & S. Kumar (Eds.), The timetree of life (pp. 375–379). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- van der Sluis, L., Hollund, H., Buckley, M., De Louw, P., Rijsdijk, K., & Kars, H. (2014). Combining histology, stable isotope analysis and ZooMS collagen fingerprinting to investigate the taphonomic history and dietary behaviour of extinct giant tortoises from the Mare aux Songes deposit on Mauritius. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 416, 80–91.Google Scholar
- van Niekerk, K. L. (2011). Marine fish exploitation during the Middle and Later Stone Age of South Africa. Azania: Archaeological Research in Africa, 46(3), 392–392.Google Scholar
- von Holstein, I. C., Ashby, S. P., van Doorn, N. L., Sachs, S. M., Buckley, M., Meiri, M., et al. (2014). Searching for Scandinavians in pre-Viking Scotland: Molecular fingerprinting of Early Medieval combs. Journal of Archaeological Science, 41, 1–6.Google Scholar
- Zeder, M. A., & Lapham, H. A. (2010). Assessing the reliability of criteria used to identify postcranial bones in sheep, Ovis, and goats, Capra. Journal of Archaeological Science, 37(11), 2887–2905.Google Scholar