30 research outputs found

    When did the chicken cross the road: archaeological and molecular evidence for ancient chickens in Central Asia

    Get PDF
    The origins and dispersal of the chicken across the ancient world remains one of the most enigmatic questions regarding Eurasian domesticated animals1,2. The lack of agreement regarding the timing and center of origin is due, in large part, to issues with morphological identifications, a lack of direct dating, and poor preservation of thin bird bones. Historical sources attest to the prominence of chickens in southern Europe and southwest Asia by the last centuries BC3. Likewise, art historical depictions of chickens and anthropomorphic rooster-human chimeras are reoccurring motifs in Central Asian prehistoric and historic traditions4-6. However, when this ritually and economically significant bird spread along the trans-Eurasian exchange routes has remained a mystery. Here we show that chickens were widely raised by people at villages across southern Central Asia from the third century BC through medieval periods for their eggs and likely also meat. In this study, we present archaeological and molecular evidence for the cultivation of chickens for egg production from 12 different Central Asian archaeological sites spanning a millennium and a half. These eggshells were recovered in high abundance at all of these sites, suggesting that chickens were widely raised by people at villages across southern Central Asia from the third century BC through medieval periods and that they were an important part of the overall diet. Contrary to views that ancient peoples of Central Asia were primarily herding sheep, goat, and cattle, these data show that chicken was also important in the subsistence economy and that it was widely spread along the ancient Silk Road.Introduction - Rapid Dissemination across the Ancient World Results - Archaeological Eggshells - Peptide Mass Fingerprinting Discussion - Evidence for Non-Seasonal Egg Laying - The Rise in Symbolic and Economic Prominence of the Chicken in Central Asia Conclusion

    Multi-messenger observations of a binary neutron star merger

    Get PDF
    On 2017 August 17 a binary neutron star coalescence candidate (later designated GW170817) with merger time 12:41:04 UTC was observed through gravitational waves by the Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo detectors. The Fermi Gamma-ray Burst Monitor independently detected a gamma-ray burst (GRB 170817A) with a time delay of ~1.7 s with respect to the merger time. From the gravitational-wave signal, the source was initially localized to a sky region of 31 deg2 at a luminosity distance of 40+8-8 Mpc and with component masses consistent with neutron stars. The component masses were later measured to be in the range 0.86 to 2.26 Mo. An extensive observing campaign was launched across the electromagnetic spectrum leading to the discovery of a bright optical transient (SSS17a, now with the IAU identification of AT 2017gfo) in NGC 4993 (at ~40 Mpc) less than 11 hours after the merger by the One- Meter, Two Hemisphere (1M2H) team using the 1 m Swope Telescope. The optical transient was independently detected by multiple teams within an hour. Subsequent observations targeted the object and its environment. Early ultraviolet observations revealed a blue transient that faded within 48 hours. Optical and infrared observations showed a redward evolution over ~10 days. Following early non-detections, X-ray and radio emission were discovered at the transient’s position ~9 and ~16 days, respectively, after the merger. Both the X-ray and radio emission likely arise from a physical process that is distinct from the one that generates the UV/optical/near-infrared emission. No ultra-high-energy gamma-rays and no neutrino candidates consistent with the source were found in follow-up searches. These observations support the hypothesis that GW170817 was produced by the merger of two neutron stars in NGC4993 followed by a short gamma-ray burst (GRB 170817A) and a kilonova/macronova powered by the radioactive decay of r-process nuclei synthesized in the ejecta

    Search for High-energy Neutrinos from Binary Neutron Star Merger GW170817 with ANTARES, IceCube, and the Pierre Auger Observatory

    Get PDF

    Where are kin recognition cues in the face?

    No full text

    Lateralization of kin recognition signals in the human face

    No full text

    Allocentric kin recognition is not affected by facial inversion

    No full text

    Obstetric and Neonatal Outcomes in Women with Pregnancy Associated Cancer: A Population-based Study in Lombardy,Northern Italy

    No full text
    Background: Pregnancy associated cancer (PAC) may lead to adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes. This study aims to assess the association between PACs and adverse perinatal outcomes [i.e. labor induction, iatrogenic delivery, preterm birth, small for gestational age (SGA) newborn, low Apgar score, major malformations, perinatal mortality] in Lombardy, Northern Italy. Methods: This population-based historic cohort study used the certificate of delivery assistance and the regional healthcare utilization databases of Lombardy Region to identify beneficiaries of National Health Service who delivered between 2008 and 2017. PACs were defined through oncological ICD-9-CM codes reported in the hospital discharge forms. Each woman with PAC was matched to four women randomly selected from those cancer-free (1:4). Log-binomial regression models were fitted to estimate crude and adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) and the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) of each perinatal outcome among PAC and cancer-free women. Results: Out of the 657,968 deliveries, 831 PACs were identified (1.26 per 1000). PAC diagnosed during pregnancy was positively associated with labor induction or planned delivery (aPR=1.80, 95% CI: 1.57-2.07), cesarean section (aPR=1.78, 95% CI: 1.49-2.11) and premature birth (aPR=6.34, 95% CI: 4.59-8.75). No association with obstetric outcomes was found among PAC diagnosed in the post-pregnancy. No association of PAC, neither during pregnancy nor in post-pregnancy was found for SGA (aPR=0.71, 95% CI: 0.36-1.35 and aPR=1.04, 95% CI: 0.78-1.39, respectively), but newborn among PAC women had a lower birth weight (p-value<0.001). Newborns of women with PAC diagnosed during pregnancy had a higher risk of borderline significance of a low Apgar score (aPR=2.65, 95% CI: 0.96-7.33) as compared to cancer-free women. Conclusion: PAC, especially when diagnosed during pregnancy, is associated with iatrogenic preterm delivery, compromising some neonatal heath indicators
    corecore