Plant remains

Text by Ingrid Bertin, Jonica Doliente, Oya Inanli, Alice Cao, and Deborah Roversi. 

Header image from J. Dunne.

Macrofossils (>0.1-0.2 mm) are the major group of plant remains from archaeological contexts. These are woods, roots and tubers, fruits and seeds (e.g. cereals, pulses, and oil crops), fungi and mosses, fibres, and plant materials modified into tools i.e. baskets, and textiles. They are mostly found in waterlogged sites, food storage rooms (e.g. silos and warehouses), wooden containers (e.g. barrels and textile packings), kitchen tools, farming implements, weapons, and their hilts. The analysis of biomolecules - DNA, proteins, and lipids found from these plant remains has the potential to provide detailed information on (1) past diets (Lee-Thorp et al., 2012); (2) culinary practices (Colonese et al., 2017); (3) plant domestication (Larsen et al., 2019); (Ramos-Madrigal et al., 2019); (Kabukcu et al., 2021), (4) plant management (Sadori, Zanchetta and Giardini, 2008; Cortese et al., 2022); and (5) provenance (This, Lacombe and Thomas, 2006). The sampling is currently limited to destructive methods, however, a small quantity of the sample is enough for biomolecular analysis. The challenges that researchers have faced are the contamination and poor preservation of the sample mainly due to detrimental environmental conditions, such as high temperature or water exposure (Briggs, 2020). Aside from the abovementioned challenges, poor sampling strategy should be avoided as it can result in a lack of representativeness and interpretability of plant remains. 

In general, the mode of sampling depends on the research objectives, the type of remains, and the type of site. There are various sampling methods - total, random, judgmental, horizontal, and vertical sampling - that can be used and each of them has its own pros and cons. It is then necessary for researchers to be knowledgeable about these sampling methods. In order to overcome these challenges, the sampling has to be carried out under controlled conditions and a suitable sampling strategy must be used. Therefore, we suggest the following protocol for biomolecular analysis of plant remains.

Sampling

Before sampling

1- Decide on the sampling strategy: 

a. Preliminary survey of the archaeological site

b. Establish the best sampling strategy with a specialist

c. Plan times and modes of collection  

2- Be sure to have the required equipment listed (see the table below)

Recording and photography

The following information should be recorded where possible: 


Sample Photography: 

Sampling and handling on site





Storage




Recommendation: If the samples for DNA need to be stored for a longer period (weeks or months), the ideal preservation method is freezing. Please note that repeated freezing/thawing cycles will negatively impact biomolecules. For lipidomic studies, keep the samples in clean (ideally combusted) glass vials or aluminum foil,  preferably in cold conditions.  Samples can be then stored in cloth bags, sterile containers, or unused plastic bags. If stored in plastic, monitor the humidity and integrity of the aluminum foil. For proteins, keep the sample in the fridge and in water if they are waterlogged, otherwise, samples can be stored at room temperature prior to biomolecular analyses. In general, cold conditions are preferable.

Limitations

Consolidation practices:  Preservatives overlay with archaeological biomarkers and are not always totally reversible. It is important to avoid consolidants made out of animal or vegetal (e.g. beeswax) in organic artefacts as it introduces a modern contamination of biomolecules. Polymers can also hide the biomarker signals in the mass spectrometer and prevent biomolecules identification (Rageot, 2015)


When possible, select non restored samples for biomolecular analyses. If the object needs to be consolidated, sample it before to have reliable samples that can be used for a range of analysis. 


If the analyses are performed on old discoveries, it is important to know the post excavation history of the object.


Degradation: When an inappropriate sampling strategy is employed, fragile plant remains can be destroyed due to overly harsh cleaning strategies. When food crusts or plant remains are present in a container or ceramic, they should not be washed; this applies for any type of residue.

The conservation of biomolecules depends on the burial environment, the age of the objects, the temperature, the humidity and so on. Therefore, it is very important to have appropriate sample recordings for interpreting the analysis results (see Recording and Photography).

It might be useful to first select a representative number of samples to screen the preservation of biomolecules including control samples.

Contaminations: Take a sample of soil sediment surrounding the plant remains/artefacts to identify contamination due to the soil burial environment (mainly for lipids & DNA). 


Pay attention to possible contaminations due to handling in the site (e.g. sunscreen, lotion or finger lipids) (Whelton et al., 2021).


For DNA & proteomics, it is best to avoid wearing animal derived clothes (leather, wool, silk) or latex gloves while handling the object. In addition, human exogenous proteins can be recovered in the samples as keratin or dermcidin (Briggs, 2020); (Hendy et al., 2018)

Further reading

Briggs, L. (2020). Ancient DNA research in maritime and underwater archaeology: Pitfalls, promise, and future directions. Open quaternary, 6. [Online]. Available at: doi:10.5334/oq.71.

Colonese, A. C. et al. (2017). New criteria for the molecular identification of cereal grains associated with archaeological artefacts. Scientific reports, 7, p.7p.

Cortese, F. et al. (2022). Isotopic reconstruction of the subsistence strategy for a Central Italian Bronze Age community (Pastena cave, 2nd millennium BCE). Archaeological and anthropological sciences, 14 (10), p.201.

Hendy, J. et al. (2018). Ancient proteins from ceramic vessels at Çatalhöyük West reveal the hidden cuisine of early farmers. Nature communications, 9 (1), pp.1–10. [Accessed 21 November 2022].

Kabukcu, C. et al. (2021). Pathways to plant domestication in Southeast Anatolia based on new data from aceramic Neolithic Gusir Höyük. Scientific reports, 11 (1), p.2112.

Larsen, C. S. et al. (2019). Bioarchaeology of Neolithic Çatalhöyük reveals fundamental transitions in health, mobility, and lifestyle in early farmers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116 (26), pp.12615–12623.

Lee-Thorp, J. et al. (2012). Isotopic evidence for an early shift to C₄ resources by Pliocene hominins in Chad. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109 (50), pp.20369–20372.

Rageot, M. (2015). Les substances naturelles en Méditerranée nord-occidentale (VIe-Ier millénaire BCE) : chimie et archéologie des matériaux exploités leurs propriétés adhésives et hydrophobes. Regert, M. and Cassen, S. (Eds). Doctoral, Université Nice Sophia Antipolis. [Online]. Available at: https://www.theses.fr/189063807 [Accessed 29 November 2022].

Ramos-Madrigal, J. et al. (2019). Palaeogenomic insights into the origins of French grapevine diversity. Nature plants, 5 (6), pp.595–603.

Sadori, L., Zanchetta, G. and Giardini, M. (2008). Last Glacial to Holocene palaeoenvironmental evolution at Lago di Pergusa (Sicily, Southern Italy) as inferred by pollen, microcharcoal, and stable isotopes. Quaternary international: the journal of the International Union for Quaternary Research, 181 (1), pp.4–14.

This, P., Lacombe, T. and Thomas, M. R. (2006). Historical origins and genetic diversity of wine grapes. Trends in genetics: TIG, 22 (9), pp.511–519.

Whelton, H. L. et al. (2021). A call for caution in the analysis of lipids and other small biomolecules from archaeological contexts. Journal of archaeological science, 132, p.105397.