| Literature DB >> 31719710 |
Jillian A Swift1,2, Michael Bunce3, Joe Dortch4, Kristina Douglass5, J Tyler Faith6, James A Fellows Yates7, Judith Field8, Simon G Haberle9,10, Eileen Jacob11, Chris N Johnson10,12, Emily Lindsey13, Eline D Lorenzen14, Julien Louys15, Gifford Miller16, Alexis M Mychajliw13, Viviane Slon17, Natalia A Villavicencio18,19, Michael R Waters20, Frido Welker21, Rachel Wood22, Michael Petraglia1, Nicole Boivin1, Patrick Roberts1.
Abstract
Drivers of Late Quaternary megafaunal extinctions are relevant to modern conservation policy in a world of growing human population density, climate change, and faunal decline. Traditional debates tend toward global solutions, blaming either dramatic climate change or dispersals of Homo sapiens to new regions. Inherent limitations to archaeological and paleontological data sets often require reliance on scant, poorly resolved lines of evidence. However, recent developments in scientific technologies allow for more local, context-specific approaches. In the present article, we highlight how developments in five such methodologies (radiocarbon approaches, stable isotope analysis, ancient DNA, ancient proteomics, microscopy) have helped drive detailed analysis of specific megafaunal species, their particular ecological settings, and responses to new competitors or predators, climate change, and other external phenomena. The detailed case studies of faunal community composition, extinction chronologies, and demographic trends enabled by these methods examine megafaunal extinctions at scales appropriate for practical understanding of threats against particular species in their habitats today.Entities:
Keywords: Anthropocene; conservation; extinction; interdisciplinary science; megafauna
Year: 2019 PMID: 31719710 PMCID: PMC6829010 DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biz105
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioscience ISSN: 0006-3568 Impact factor: 8.589
Figure 1.Advances in laboratory methods enable high-resolution insights into megafaunal extinctions. Applications of such methods (radiocarbon dating, stable isotope analysis, ancient DNA, ancient proteins, and microscopy or high-resolution imaging) complement traditional paleontological and zooarchaeological approaches to glean new insights via analysis of a single megafaunal bone, complete faunal assemblages, or the surrounding paleoenvironmental context.
Comparison of three biomolecular methods (bulk bone aDNA metabarcoding, sedimentary aDNA analysis, and collagen peptide-mass fingerprinting) for deriving community-scale taxonomic information without analyzing morphologically identifiable zooarchaeological remains.
| Bulk Bone aDNA Metabarcoding (BBM) | Collagen Peptide Mass Fingerprinting (ZooMS) | Sedimentary aDNA | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sample substrate | Entire fossil bone assemblages, including fragmentary and nondiagnostic elements | Single fragmentary, undiagnostic bone element | Sediment |
| Cost (per sample) | $40–$80 (excluding sequencing costs) | Under $10 | $40 (excluding sequencing costs) |
| Processing time | 2–4 weeks | 2 days | 4 weeks |
| Primary research product | In-depth insights into faunal assemblages | Taxonomic classification for individual specimens | Identifications of various floral and faunal taxa present in a sample |
| Additional by-products | Rapid assessment of DNA preservation through time; the ability to identify genetic haplotypes | Protein damage assessment for individual specimens | DNA damage assessment per taxon; taxonomic composition of microbial DNA |
| Considerations | Well suited to all vertebrates but especially valuable in identifying fish, reptiles and amphibians that are not easily identified using morphology; best suited when assemblages are compared through a sequence. | Currently largely restricted to mammals; limited phylogenetic depth; dependent on available peptide marker databases. | Authentication of the DNA fragments critical for interpretation; accuracy of taxonomic classification dependent on available comparative databases; movement of DNA across layers needs to be considered. |
| Replication | Can do replicate bone samples to check for species saturation. If entire bone fragment is used additional studies on same specimen are not possible. | Can conduct multiple and subsequently alternative analyses on specimens of high taxonomic interest. | Can conduct multiple and subsequently alternative analyses on samples of interest. |
| Ideal contexts | Ideally suited to cold or temperate localities but has been applied to warm tropical environs. Tropical environments require short metabarcoding assays. | Proteins are accessible from permafrost to tropical localities. | aDNA preserves better in cool, stable environments. Best suited to well-stratified deposits. |