What is it about?
the study evaluates the preservation of the microstructure of skeletal remains collected from four different known burial sites (archaeological and contemporary). Histological analysis on undecalcified and decalcified thin sections was performed in order to assess which of the two techniques is more affected by taphonomic insults.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
with this reaserch two different techniques of bone preparation for histological analysis was tested, undecalcified and decalcified thin sections, to assess which preparation is more affected by taphonomic insult and to verify which one allows a better reading of bone tissue in order to perform further analytical techniques.
Perspectives
The preservation of the bone microscopic structure appears to be influenced not only by age, but also by the burial context. Undecalcified bones appear to be more affected by taphonomical alterations, probably because of the thickness of the thin sections; on the contrary, decalcified thin sections proved to be able to tackle this issue allowing a better reading of the bone tissue.
Dr Valentina Caruso
Universita degli Studi di Milano
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: A comparative analysis of microscopic alterations in modern and ancient undecalcified and decalcified dry bones, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, October 2017, Wiley,
DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.23348.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
