Outlining the Role of Bacteria in Humans, and Archaeology
Today’s music playlist is co-authored by me (Vangelis, theme from Blade Runner) and the YouTube AI. Presumably, the AI knows me well enough to suggest music based on my own previous choices. I can’t dispute that it’s the type of music that I would listen to on my own (its moved onto The Stones, Gimmee Shelter); however, the playlist does reflect some unusual directions in taste. I have always had eclectic interests, and they have continued to diverge from the norm as I’ve gotten older. And I reach the same conclusion when I consider my approach to writing a research paper.
My first, and greatest challenge, is aligning my interests, and perspectives, with academic expectations (profs, other students).
For the upcoming paper, I plan to focus on bacteria. Normally the subject itself would be sufficient to characterize my work as “bio-anthropology”; instead, I’m looking at bacteria as artifacts. I want to put an archaeology spin on the subject. Humanity evolved with bacteria, and we owe our complexity and lives to bacteria. Most cells in our bodies have mitochondria, organelles responsible for providing the energy used by our bodies. These cells are unique, and possess their own DNA. It is likely that millions of years ago, these were invading bacteria in prokaryotic cells, and we have continued to evolve with this unique and necessary bacterial infection. In perhaps a limited sense, we continue to carry an artifact of an ancient bacterial infection within us (ironically, YouTube is playing Modern English for me: “I’ll stop the world and melt with you”).
Bacteria are most frequently seen as agents playing a role in disease. Anthropologists look at a bone, and describe pathology – the abnormality; from this, they infer a role for bacteria or other microorganisms. It’s a simple and well established relationship; however, like many relationships, it ignores the complexities that add colour and depth to the relationship. I want to move beyond diseases, and focus on other aspects of the relationship.
Bacteria can provide new insights into human activity. Analysis of microbial communities can provide information on the presence of a particular site or site type (Rostami-Charati et al., 2022); possible dates of a site (Mura et al., 2021), food consumption (eg Margesin et al., 2017; Kashirskaya et al., 2023), and may serve as a marker for migrations and trade relationships. Bacteria also play a role in archaeology as agents of destruction; for example, in the destruction of engineering material in the marine environment (e.g. Jurgens et al., 2005). An initial investigation suggests that there is enough material to provide a review of the subject that goes beyond the typical assessment of the bacterial process in human disease.
The due date assigned for this paper is 15 April; therefore, I have to create a timetable that will support my writing process:
05 February – draft my internal outline to guide research, collection of notes, provide internal direction
05 February to 01 March – literature review
01 March – 08 March – write initial draft
08 March – submit initial draft for external review to fellow cohort members, microbiologist
19 March – review of initial draft of paper in class
30 March – final date for external review (gives reviewers approximately 3 weeks)
05 April – complete revised draft based on external comments and personal review
At this point, I will send out the draft for my “mother review” – Mom is an intelligent and cranky lady. She has a passing interest in archaeology, and loves microbiology (as much as a mother can). She will read the paper, and she is completely merciless if I try to slip in something that does not make sense. I will also resubmit the paper to previous reviewers as well … but none of these will produce a “mother-proof” paper!
12 April – Final review of the paper
15 April – Formal submission of the paper to the class
When laid out in cleanly-defined chronological order, it almost seems natural, clear and easy to understand and complete. What lies beneath the surface is the ADHD paradox: I need structure and organization to achieve an objective, yet my personality denies and refuses to be organized, or to accept the external imposition of order!
For that reason, I will not commit to a writing log. I fully agree that what is managed must be measured; I understand how it sheds light on the process; I wish that I was the person who could follow a consistent process. However, I know from experience that I will start by logging my writing, and then I will be writing to conform to the log, and then -detesting the process that is overriding the creation- I will stop both writing and logging. So, my process will progress according to swathes of time interrupted by milestone dates!
(Finishing with Dexys Midnight Runners, Show Me).
As someone who does not have the most scientific of backgrounds, I love how you explained your paper and it makes sense to me! Bacteria as artifacts, very cool. Usually they’re portrayed as disease-causing villains in narratives of humanity, and this is a very welcome change of pace. I look forward to seeing the progress of your paper.
And keep the music and memes coming!
Bailey –
It’s a fun way about thinking of microorganisms, especially bacteria. Still trying to understand current state of the art, and then how to extend it to really grab some of the more modern biological research. Can’t wait to share!
Robb
I love when new ideas come to light that seem as if they should have always been considered.
The way you write presents such a great case, it certainly made me believe that we have been doing a disservice to archaeology by not considering bacteria as artifacts.
My own work right now is focusing on why ‘social zooarchaeology’ should be a part of analyses. This is essentially referring to understanding animals as agents, or at least more than just a mode of understanding subsistence. I look forward to the growth of both of these areas of research!
Robb,
Looks good! This would conform nicely to a “Reviews in Anthropology” literature review, in so far as you will be weaving a variety of different themes together into some sort of broader argument. Do take a look at those.
My only suggestion is to integrate as much writing in the “Literature review” step since…(yes)…writing is thinking.
Hi Robb,
I’m really looking forward to reading your paper. In all honesty, the idea of bacteria as artifacts seems a bit unorthodox to me, but that makes it all the more interesting and, most importantly, significant! I agree that bacteria tend to get more of a bad wrap than deserved with such preoccupations on pathology, so it’ll be an informative, refreshing change of pace to learn more about the positive highlights of our symbiotic relationship with bacteria since time immemorial.
One question about the structure of your paper, just out of curiosity (and as a fellow ADHDer, I completely understand if you’re not sure yet! lol). I’m not sure if my wording makes sense, but are you going to frame it along the lines of artifacts reflecting specific actions/developments, kind of like how you have it laid out above (i.e., artifacts of x process, which can include y and z bacteria), or frame it as specific bacteria as artifacts (i.e., x bacteria is an artifact, which can reflect y and z processes)?
Selby –
The good news is that the breadth of biological research doubles every 18 months or so; the bad news is that there is so much information that it can be hard to understand the current state of the art.
I think that right now the research frames “bacteria” (usually the family, but species if the bacteria is biologically interesting or medically important) as an artifact associated with a process. For example, the spores of Bacillus anthracis, which causes anthrax, will be found to be associated with particular types of animals (such as goats). However, you could look at that statement backwards, and suggest that the spores could be used to produce a map of the domestication process for goats or sheep…
Big question, and I am not sure how it will unfold.
I shall, however, endeavour to make it “quite exciting”!
R