Mummy Had Lung Infection, Technique Reveals

Shotgun proteomics on a corpse can determine whether someone was actually suffering from a disease rather than just carrying it. Evelyn Lamb reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Five-hundred years ago, a 15-year-old Incan girl was sacrificed, along with two other children. Her mummy has now revealed that she had an active lung infection at her death. Because a technique called shotgun proteomics has been used to determine whether someone was actually suffering from a disease rather than just carrying it. The report appears in the journal PLoS ONE. [Angelique Corthals et al., Detecting the Immune System Response of a 500-Year-Old Inca Mummy]

Previous research into ancient diseases has used DNA analysis to determine the presence of pathogens. But with DNA, there's no way to tell latent infections from the full-blown, misery-inducing ones.

Researchers analyzed protein samples from the mummies of two of the slain children. The girl's proteins indicated an immune response to bacteria, perhaps a pathogen related to tuberculosis. Other evidence, such as mucus under her nose and lung abnormalities, strengthened the diagnosis. The seven-year-old boy, on the other hand, showed no signs of infection.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


This is the first time the technique has been used. It’s a small sample, but further development of shotgun proteomics has the potential to improve our understanding of ancient disease, as well as assisting in tomorrow’s forensic investigations.

—Evelyn Lamb

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe