Trends and perspectives in 

 paleoparasitological research 



U.E.C. Confalonieri, L.F. Ferreira, A.J.G. Araujo, M. Chame, 



and B.M. Ribeiro Filho 



This report presents some methodological questions in- 

 volved with our research on parasites from archeological 

 material in Brazil. Our investigations deal mainly with para- 

 sitological findings in human and animal coprolites from 

 South American archeological sites and rarely with mum- 

 mies, since, for paleoecological and paleoanthropological 

 reasons, mummies are not common in Brazil. A review of 

 helminths in mummified human remains has been presented 

 recently (Home 1986:4-5). 



The first finding of parasites in archeological material was 

 in 1910, when Ruffer found Schistosoma haematobium eggs 

 in renal tissue of Egyptian mummies, and paieoparasitology 

 has been growing ever since as a scientific discipline. The 

 term "paieoparasitology" was first used by Jean Baer 

 (1971:317), although he mentioned it only parenthetically, 

 commenting on the study of the coevolution of hosts and 

 parasites. It acquired its definitive meaning after the first 

 paper of Ferreira et al. (1979) and is widely used today to 

 characterize the study of parasitic forms in archeological 

 material. After some decades of research, interesting find- 

 ings have been obtained, and new questions arise concerning 

 the interpretation of these findings. In this report we relate 

 our experience regarding the use of some methods in pal- 

 eoparasitological investigation as well as difficulties in the 

 interpretation of the data. 



In a recent review, Reinhard et al. (1988) discussed the 

 principal techniques for isolation of parasitic forms from 

 coprolites in soil and fecal deposits from archeological sites, 

 and thus these will not be commented upon here. 



In paieoparasitology as well as in paleopathology sensu 

 stricto, the main methodological question is the reliability of 

 the diagnosis of the material. Our experience primarily in- 

 volves the study of eggs and larvae of intestinal parasitic 

 helminths found in archeological material from South Amer- 

 ica. These differ to some extent from those in the Old World 

 material (see below). 



The methodological issues with which we deal involve 

 three main aspects: ( 1 ) identification of the zoological origin 



of the material found (human or animal?); (2) recognition of 

 the possible morphological alterations in the parasitic forms 

 resulting from the desiccation process in archeological de- 

 posits or from other physical and biological events during 

 many centuries; (3) better techniques for studying parasite 

 morphology, aimed toward their specific identification. 



It is necessary to stress that the approach to these questions 

 is based on knowledge from zoological and morphological 

 sciences, biometrics, electron microscopy, and biochemis- 

 try. We will comment only on analysis of helminths, since the 

 other common intestinal parasites, the protozoans, are poorly 

 preserved and can rarely be found. 



The first problem faced by paleoparasitologists is the iden- 

 tification of the origins of coprolite material found free in 

 archeological sites, that is, outside mummified bodies. It 

 must be stressed there is an important difference regarding 

 the contents of parasite-containing archeological sediments 

 from the New World and the Old World. Because the latter 

 sites are mostly historical and urban, the possibility of mis- 

 diagnosis lies between human coprolites and fecal material 

 produced by domestic animals. In the American sites, at least 

 those from South America, human coprolites have been 

 found in places which could have been also occupied only by 

 wild animals, since the South American Paleo-Indian did not 

 domesticate animals. Therefore we are doing surveys at the 

 archeological sites in the semi-arid regions of Brazil to in- 

 crease our knowledge of the morphological aspects and con- 

 tents of the feces of recent local fauna, basically the same 

 animals as from the prehistoric Holocene. This approach was 

 initiated by Fry (1977:7) and is being used to describe the 

 size, form and contents of fresh animal feces as well as feces 

 naturally and artificially desiccated. With this we intend to 

 prepare a catalogue to serve as a guide for the identification 

 of coprolites. So far the results are encouraging because of 

 the peculiarities of South American fauna in general, particu- 

 larly at Brazilian excavation sites where there are few large 

 omnivorous or carnivorous animals whose feces could be 

 more easily misidentified as those of human origin. 



76 



Zagreb Paleopathology Symp 1988 



