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

The use of immunological techniques for identifying the origin of proteins and inferring foodstuffs exploited by prehistoric occupations has been conducted for several decades. Cases of experimental laboratory and archaeological studies have shown the potential of these techniques for reliable results. However, very few of these case studies employ archaeological sites that have excellent preservation and high-resolution spatial contexts between identifiable faunal remains, features, and stone tools. We present an assessment of the identification reliability of one immunological technique, protein radioimmunoassay (pRIA), using faunal remains and stone tools from two sites from arctic and subarctic contexts. The results of this research indicate that, even in contexts with excellent preservation, the identifications produced by the pRIA technique are subject to misidentification and cross-reactions due to diagenetic alteration of proteins. We propose a higher minimum reaction value (percent binding of labeled antibody) that mitigates these effects, and renders the pRIA results more reliable for ancient, poorly preserved organic remains.     

The German Argentines between Nazism and Nationalism: The Patagonia Plot of 1939

Abstract

When seizing control of the US embassy In Tehran in November 1979 during the Iranian revolution, militant students not only took sixty-one US citizens hostage, but also captured thousands of pages of official documents. During the 1980s, they published seventy-seven volumes of selections in order to prove to the world that the United States had colluded with the Pahlavi regime, and to discredit Iranian moderates by revealing their former ties to US officials. In keeping with the militants' perception of the embassy's role in Iran's domestic politics, they entitled the publications Documents from the US Espionage Den (Asnad-i Lanah-yi Jasusi).¹ Surprisingly, among the papers published is one by Harvard University anthropologist Michael M. J. Fischer entitled ‘Religion and Progress in Iran’, apparently written for a state department colloquium on Iran held on 25 May 1979. In the introduction, Fischer characterizes the Islamic Republic as a ‘challenge to modernization theory’: ‘Iran has been a major test case for modernization theory throughout the 1960s and 1970s. It was the case where the constraint of capital was theoretically removed, and therefore the case where transformation from the third world into the first world was expected to be most feasible.’²