Blood Protein Residues on Lithic Artifacts from Two Archaeological Sites in the De Long Mountains, Northwestern Alaska

Abstract

Immunological analysis of blood residues was performed on 25 lithic artifacts from two archaeological sites (DEL-166 and DEL-168) in the De Long Mountains of northwestern Alaska. Blood residues occur on five artifact types: retouched flakes; end scrapers; flake burins; bifaces; and wedge-shaped microblade cores. Fourteen (56%) of the 25 analyzed artifacts react positively to six animal antisera and to human blood. Besides human blood, identified residues include the blood of sturgeon (Acipenseridae), deer (Cervidae), rabbit (Leporidae), bear (Ursus), "cat" (Felidae) and "mouse" (Rodentia). Although the application of blood residue analysis to archaeological problems is a relatively new application of an old forensic method, it may provide useful information about artifact function and animal procurement from sites where faunal remains are not preserved.

Integration of use-wear with protein residue analysis – a study of tool use and function in the south Scandinavian Early Neolithic

“…Ancient protein residues are preserved and have been detected on stone tools of considerable age using CIEP (Gerlach et al, 1996;Kooyman et al, 2001;Seeman et al, 2008;Yost, 2008). In one of the largest samples of reactive protein residues from an archaeological site, Gerlach et al (1996) report a total of 45 positive reactions obtained on 40 of the 130 stone tools tested from an early North American Paleoindian site (ca.…”

“…In one of the largest samples of reactive protein residues from an archaeological site, Gerlach et al (1996) report a total of 45 positive reactions obtained on 40 of the 130 stone tools tested from an early North American Paleoindian site (ca. 11,200-10,800 years BP).…”

Assessing the reliability of pRIA for identifying ancient proteins from archaeological contexts

“…Archaeological questions that immunochemistry techniques can contribute to our knowledge include: potential direct evidence on the role of humans in the extinction of Pleistocene species (Loy and Dixon, 1998;Kooyman et al, 2006); the ability to provide relative minimum age estimates on tools with adhering residues of extinct animals such as mammoth, mastodon, and North American Equids (Loy and Dixon, 1998); the relationship between artifacts and faunal remains with less than desirable associative contexts (e.g., disturbed and/or surface finds; Dixon and Marlar, 1997;Kooyman et al, 2001;; the function of different artifact types and the nature of paleo-subsistence (Gerlach et al, 1996;Seeman et al, 2008); and human sacrifice rituals and cannibalism (Bourget and Newman, 1998;Marlar et al, 2000). Child and Pollard (1992), Marlar et al (1995), and Smith and Wilson (2001) provide excellent reviews of the use of these techniques in archaeological studies.…”

Identification of animal species by protein radioimmunoassay of bone fragments and bloodstained stone tools

“…Since Loy [5] first reported finding prehistoric blood residues on stone tools, blood residue analysis has been used in archaeological research to answer questions about a variety of topics, including associational problems among artifacts and faunal remains [6] and artifact function [7,8]. Researchers have conducted several controlled and comparative studies that attempt to test the reliability of techniques used in archaeological research [9][10][11][12].…”