Access
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Scientific Correspondence
Nature 394, 534 (6 August 1998) | doi:10.1038/28982
Open Innovation Challenges
-
Direct Molecular Detection of Proteins and Nucleic Acids
This Challenge is looking for novel approaches to protein and nucleic acid detection. This is an Id...
-
Methods of Modeling Adaptation in Populations
The analysis of adaptation with a population is a frequently encountered computational modeling scen...
- More Challenges
- Powered by:
nature jobs
3 Postdoctoral positions available
- Baylor College of Medicine
- Houston, Texas, USA
Business Devlopment Officer
- Rhydburg Pharmaceuticals
- Selaqui-Dehradun India
Reply: A Roman "implant" reconsidered
Eric Crubézy1, Pascal Murail2, Louis Girard2 & Jean-Pierre Bernadou3
Abstract
Crubézy et al. reply — We disagree with Becker's view that the dental implant described in our earlier Scientific Correspondence1 is a natural canine stained with iron oxides. The dental implant was located in a position normally taken by the upper second right premolar, a position in which a normal canine would not be found. Furthermore, the only goods associated with this burial were pottery, not iron or any metal objects2. Even if there had been iron oxide contamination, it is unlikely that it would have affected only one tooth. Figure 1a in our earlier Scientific Correspondence shows that the piece of metal is corroded on its periphery; the "smooth, intact surface" observed on the X-ray is a common artefact of the technique. Finally, we have already noted that the implant was broken and that metallurgical analysis unambiguously identifies it as metal and not as a biological tissue.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
