Search

The insertion sequence IS6110 is frequently used as a marker for the presence of ancient DNA (aDNA) derived from bacteria of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) in human archaeological remains. The specificity of polymerase chain reactions (PCRs) directed at IS6110 has, however, been questioned, because identical or similar elements have been identified in ‘mycobacteria other than tuberculosis (MOTT)’. These are Mycobacterium species, common in the environment, which may occasionally cause opportunistic diseases and are not normally associated with clinical cases of tuberculosis (TB). We report the presence of two sequence types that are similar, but not identical, to IS6110 in bone samples from nine skeletons dated mainly to the Roman period, one from Scotland and the others from the remainder of Britain. The sources of these sequences cannot be established but they are most likely derived from environmental bacteria that have colonised the skeletons after death. The data presented support the notion that IS6110 may not be unique to the members of the MTBC and is, therefore, not suitable as a specific marker for the identification of TB in human remains. Statement of significance Individuals who suffered from tuberculosis in the past can sometimes be identified by examining archaeological skeletons for the presence of DNA from the bacteria that cause the disease. Often the DNA that is searched for is a sequence called IS6110, which is thought to be present only in the Mycobacterium tuberculosis family of bacteria. If the IS6110 sequence is detected in a bone or tooth then that individual must have been infected with tuberculosis bacteria. This test has been used frequently since the 1990s to identify tuberculosis in archaeological remains, but we show that it is not accurate. Sequences similar to IS6110 are also present in other bacteria, including ones that live in soil and which might get into a bone or tooth while the skeleton is buried. The IS6110 test should not therefore be used to detect archaeological tuberculosis unless accompanied by other tests that are more specific. Data availability The authors confirm that all data underlying the findings are fully available without restriction. All relevant data are contained within the paper.

EXCAVATIONS at Addingham in Wharfedale uncovered part of a cemetery which, on the evidence of radiocarbon analysis, can be dated to the 8th to 10th centuries A.D. At that period Addingham was an estate of the archbishops of York, and it was to here that Archbishop Wulfhere fled in 867 to escape the Danes. A total of 55 graves were investigated, yielding the remains of perhaps 80 individuals. Of these, about 40 wert undisturbed primary interments; the rest had been reburied in whole or part, leaving some graves empty and others containing several individuals. Later features included a ditch and a drying kiln which belonged to a post-Conquest manorial complex. Further details on the layout and components of the settlement have been gleaned from earthwork survey, geophysical prospection and documentary research, as well as from earlier excavations which until now remained unpublished.

The history of leprosy is briefly outlined. First recorded is an Indian source of the sixth century BC and a Chinese text of the third century. The earliest recorded skeletal evidence comes from the Dakhleh Oasis dating to the second century BC. By the fifth century AD the disease had reached Britain and rose to a peak between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries. By the sixteenth century it had declined rapidly. Questions of early diagnosis and treatment are considered.