通过古蛋白质组学分析新石器时代早期肱骨的商用微创取样方法比较研究

IF 2.6 1区 地球科学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY
Jakob Hansen , Joannes Dekker , Gaudry Troché , Zandra Fagernäs , Jesper V. Olsen , Maria Saña Seguí , Frido Welker
{"title":"通过古蛋白质组学分析新石器时代早期肱骨的商用微创取样方法比较研究","authors":"Jakob Hansen ,&nbsp;Joannes Dekker ,&nbsp;Gaudry Troché ,&nbsp;Zandra Fagernäs ,&nbsp;Jesper V. Olsen ,&nbsp;Maria Saña Seguí ,&nbsp;Frido Welker","doi":"10.1016/j.jas.2024.106002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Due to methodological advances in the archaeological sciences, an increasing number of archaeological specimens undergo destructive sampling. However, the preservation of cultural heritage is a primary concern. This leads to a dilemma between accessing sample material and obtaining sufficient information for a meaningful analytical outcome. Ideally, sampling a specimen would preserve the object for further macro, micro, and molecular analyses. For palaeoproteomics, a number of minimally invasive sampling approaches have been proposed, representing different benefits and limitations. There have been studies comparing a selection of these protocols, however, these have focused on specimens from a homogenous preservation environment using Zooarchaeology by Mass Spectrometry (ZooMS). Here we expand on earlier work by extending the comparison to specimens from two highly different preservation environments through both ZooMS and liquid-chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). We compare five sampling approaches and seven extraction protocols in total, on 10 <em>Bos</em> sp. humeri from the Early Neolithic site of La Draga, Spain, utilising MALDI-ToF MS and LC-MS/MS to generate proteomic output, while assessing protocol invasiveness using microscopy and 3D imaging. Five humeri originate from Sector A, which is mostly related to dry, terrestrial preservation conditions, while the other five humeri stem from Sector B, which is characterised by its phreatic/aquatic preservation conditions. We show that there is a significant difference in protein recovery and taxonomic specificity between the sampling techniques applied, as well as between burial conditions. Additionally, various surface modifications were observed depending on the specific sampling technique applied. It is therefore essential to assess protein preservation for each sedimentological context within an archaeological site before performing extensive sampling, as protein preservation can be highly inter- and intra-site-specific.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50254,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Archaeological Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305440324000700/pdfft?md5=5c14860be2d248108de77e8cd481e41b&pid=1-s2.0-S0305440324000700-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative study of commercially available, minimally invasive, sampling methods on Early Neolithic humeri analysed via palaeoproteomics\",\"authors\":\"Jakob Hansen ,&nbsp;Joannes Dekker ,&nbsp;Gaudry Troché ,&nbsp;Zandra Fagernäs ,&nbsp;Jesper V. Olsen ,&nbsp;Maria Saña Seguí ,&nbsp;Frido Welker\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jas.2024.106002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Due to methodological advances in the archaeological sciences, an increasing number of archaeological specimens undergo destructive sampling. However, the preservation of cultural heritage is a primary concern. This leads to a dilemma between accessing sample material and obtaining sufficient information for a meaningful analytical outcome. Ideally, sampling a specimen would preserve the object for further macro, micro, and molecular analyses. For palaeoproteomics, a number of minimally invasive sampling approaches have been proposed, representing different benefits and limitations. There have been studies comparing a selection of these protocols, however, these have focused on specimens from a homogenous preservation environment using Zooarchaeology by Mass Spectrometry (ZooMS). Here we expand on earlier work by extending the comparison to specimens from two highly different preservation environments through both ZooMS and liquid-chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). We compare five sampling approaches and seven extraction protocols in total, on 10 <em>Bos</em> sp. humeri from the Early Neolithic site of La Draga, Spain, utilising MALDI-ToF MS and LC-MS/MS to generate proteomic output, while assessing protocol invasiveness using microscopy and 3D imaging. Five humeri originate from Sector A, which is mostly related to dry, terrestrial preservation conditions, while the other five humeri stem from Sector B, which is characterised by its phreatic/aquatic preservation conditions. We show that there is a significant difference in protein recovery and taxonomic specificity between the sampling techniques applied, as well as between burial conditions. Additionally, various surface modifications were observed depending on the specific sampling technique applied. It is therefore essential to assess protein preservation for each sedimentological context within an archaeological site before performing extensive sampling, as protein preservation can be highly inter- and intra-site-specific.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50254,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Archaeological Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305440324000700/pdfft?md5=5c14860be2d248108de77e8cd481e41b&pid=1-s2.0-S0305440324000700-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Archaeological Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305440324000700\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Archaeological Science","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305440324000700","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

由于考古科学方法的进步,越来越多的考古标本需要进行破坏性取样。然而,保护文化遗产是首要问题。这就导致了在获取样本材料和获取足够信息以获得有意义的分析结果之间的两难选择。理想情况下,对标本进行取样可以保护文物,以便进行进一步的宏观、微观和分子分析。对于古蛋白质组学,已经提出了许多微创取样方法,这些方法具有不同的优势和局限性。已经有研究对这些方法进行了比较,但这些研究都集中在使用质谱法动物考古学(Zooarchaeology by Mass Spectrometry,ZooMS)对来自同质保存环境的标本进行分析。在此,我们在先前工作的基础上,通过动物质谱法和液相色谱串联质谱法(LC-MS/MS),将比较范围扩大到来自两种高度不同保存环境的标本。我们利用 MALDI-ToF MS 和 LC-MS/MS 来生成蛋白质组输出结果,同时利用显微镜和三维成像技术来评估方案的侵入性。五块肱骨来自 A 区,主要与干燥的陆地保存条件有关,而另外五块肱骨则来自 B 区,其特点是具有呼吸/水生保存条件。我们的研究表明,不同的取样技术和不同的埋藏条件在蛋白质回收率和分类特异性方面存在显著差异。此外,根据所采用的具体取样技术,还观察到了不同的表面修饰。因此,在进行大范围取样之前,必须评估考古遗址中每种沉积背景下的蛋白质保存情况,因为蛋白质的保存在遗址之间和遗址内部都有很大的特异性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A comparative study of commercially available, minimally invasive, sampling methods on Early Neolithic humeri analysed via palaeoproteomics

Due to methodological advances in the archaeological sciences, an increasing number of archaeological specimens undergo destructive sampling. However, the preservation of cultural heritage is a primary concern. This leads to a dilemma between accessing sample material and obtaining sufficient information for a meaningful analytical outcome. Ideally, sampling a specimen would preserve the object for further macro, micro, and molecular analyses. For palaeoproteomics, a number of minimally invasive sampling approaches have been proposed, representing different benefits and limitations. There have been studies comparing a selection of these protocols, however, these have focused on specimens from a homogenous preservation environment using Zooarchaeology by Mass Spectrometry (ZooMS). Here we expand on earlier work by extending the comparison to specimens from two highly different preservation environments through both ZooMS and liquid-chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). We compare five sampling approaches and seven extraction protocols in total, on 10 Bos sp. humeri from the Early Neolithic site of La Draga, Spain, utilising MALDI-ToF MS and LC-MS/MS to generate proteomic output, while assessing protocol invasiveness using microscopy and 3D imaging. Five humeri originate from Sector A, which is mostly related to dry, terrestrial preservation conditions, while the other five humeri stem from Sector B, which is characterised by its phreatic/aquatic preservation conditions. We show that there is a significant difference in protein recovery and taxonomic specificity between the sampling techniques applied, as well as between burial conditions. Additionally, various surface modifications were observed depending on the specific sampling technique applied. It is therefore essential to assess protein preservation for each sedimentological context within an archaeological site before performing extensive sampling, as protein preservation can be highly inter- and intra-site-specific.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Archaeological Science
Journal of Archaeological Science 地学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
7.10%
发文量
112
审稿时长
49 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Archaeological Science is aimed at archaeologists and scientists with particular interests in advancing the development and application of scientific techniques and methodologies to all areas of archaeology. This established monthly journal publishes focus articles, original research papers and major review articles, of wide archaeological significance. The journal provides an international forum for archaeologists and scientists from widely different scientific backgrounds who share a common interest in developing and applying scientific methods to inform major debates through improving the quality and reliability of scientific information derived from archaeological research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信