Affiliation:
1. School of Archaeological and Forensic Sciences University of Bradford Bradford UK
2. School of Chemical and Biological Sciences University of Bradford Bradford UK
3. Department of Archaeology University of York York UK
4. School of Chemistry University of Birmingham Birmingham UK
5. Former Institute of Archaeology and Antiquity University of Birmingham Birmingham UK
6. Department of Anthropology McMaster University Hamilton Ontario Canada
Abstract
AbstractObjectivesThis research aimed to replicate the Swinson, D., Snaith, J., Buckberry, J., & Brickley, M. (2010). High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) in the investigation of gout in paleopathology. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, 20, 135–143. https://doi.org/10.1002/oa.1009 method for detecting uric acid in archeological human remains to investigate gout in past populations and to improve the original High Performance Liquid Chromatography‐ultraviolet (HPLC‐UV) method by using HPLC‐mass spectrometry (HPLC‐MS), a more sensitive, compound‐specific detection method.Materials and MethodsWe used reference samples of uric acid to create a dilution series to assess the limits of quantification and detection. Samples from individuals with and without gout lesions were taken from foot bones and ribs from the English cemeteries of Tanyard, Hickleton, Gloucester, and Lincoln.ResultsWe could not replicate the results of Swinson and colleagues using HPLC‐UV. Tests using a dilution series of uric acid showed HPLC‐MS was approximately 100× more sensitive than HPLC‐UV, with the additional benefit of being compound specific. A newly developed hydrophilic interaction chromatography (HILIC) method improved retention characteristics. Fourteen samples from eight individuals, five with skeletal lesions consistent with gout, were analyzed with the final method. None showed evidence of uric acid despite the newly developed method's improved sensitivity and specificity.DiscussionThe lack of detectable uric acid extracted from these samples suggests that (1) urate crystals were not present in any of the bone samples, regardless of gout status; (2) urate crystals did not survive these specific archeological conditions; or (3) the concentration of uric acid in our bone extracts was low, and thus larger samples would be required.
Reference19 articles.
1. Atkin M.(1983).Excavations on the Ladybellegate street Car Park Gloucester[Unpublished manuscript]. BARC University of Bradford.
2. BARC. (2016).Biological anthropology research Centre (BARC) human remains policy.https://www.bradford.ac.uk/archaeological-forensic-sciences/facilities/barc/BARC_human_remains_policy.pdf
3. Brickley M.(2004).The skeletons. In: Lewis D editor.The Tanyard and Quaker burial ground Bromyard Herefordshire SMR No. 31059. An interim report on an archaeological excavation monitoring and recording[Unpublished report]. Archenfield Archaeology.
4. Uric Acid - Key Ingredient in the Recipe for Cardiorenal Metabolic Syndrome
5. Factors influencing the crystallization of monosodium urate: a systematic literature review