MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403999602 · doi:10.1016/j.qeh.2024.100038

Assessing the applicability of protein residues in combination with lipid residues to reconstruct Indus foodways from Gujarat

2024· article· en· W4403999602 on OpenAlexafffund
Kalyan Chakraborty, Lindsey Paskulin, Prabodh Shirvalkar, Yadubirsingh Rawat, Heather M.‐L. Miller, G. F. Slater, Camilla Speller

Bibliographic record

VenueQuaternary Environments and Humans · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
KeywordsIndusFoodwaysChemistryBiologyAnthropologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When extracted and analysed in tandem, proteomics and lipid residue analysis can provide high resolution identification of ancient foodstuff. Here, we apply lipid residue and shotgun proteomic analyses to 11 ceramic vessel sherds from the Gujarat, India-based Indus Valley Civilization site of Kotada Bhadli. Our results demonstrate variable success. Lipids were successfully recovered from each ceramic vessel and suggest the presence of dairy and meat from cattle/buffalo, and meat from sheep/goat and monogastric animals, such as pigs and birds. Additionally, we were also able to identify the presence of plant products such as leafy vegetables, oils and broomcorn millets. In contrast, none of the extracted proteins could be confidently traced to specific foods or ingredients and were thus unable to contribute to broader interpretations of foodways at Kotada Bhadli. Nevertheless, our results present an opportunity to discuss pathways for improving proteomic methods, and advocate for the need to report negative results as well as positive ones. We support continued efforts to apply multi-proxy approaches to the study of ancient ceramics and consider future applications of shotgun proteomics in this rapidly evolving field.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuaternary Environments and HumansSame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207